REDD+ READINESS SELF-ASSESSMENT FOR INDONESIA · The REDD+ Readiness Self-Assessment was conducted ... REDD+ Readiness Self-Assessment for Indonesia ... dan Inovasi Kehutanan, Forestry

REDD+ Readiness Self-Assessment for Indonesia | 1

REPUBLIC OF INDONESIA

REDD+ READINESS SELF-ASSESSMENT FOR INDONESIA

SUBMITTED TO THE FOREST CARBON PARTNERSHIP FACILITY (FCPF)

Bogor, July 2017


REDD+ Readiness Self-Assessment for Indonesia submitted to the Forest Carbon Partnership

Facility (FCPF)

Copyright ©Republic of Indonesia, 2017

Citation:

[P3SEKPI]. 2017. REDD+ Readiness Self-Assessment for Indonesia submitted to the Forest Carbon

Partnership Facility (FCPF). Center for Research and Development on Social, Economy, Policy and Climate

Change (P3SEKPI), Forestry Research, Development, and Innovation Agency, Ministry of Environment and

Forestry (FORDIA, MoEF), Republic of Indonesia.

Facilitator

Ellyn Kathalina Damayanti

Acknowledgments:

The P3SEKPI-FCPF and Climate Change Mitigation Directorate team of

Bambang Supriyanto

Niken Sakuntaladewi

Tri Wahyudiyati

Novia Widyaningtyas

Yanto Rochmayanto

Arief Darmawan

Andi F. Yahya


Executive Summary

The REDD+ Readiness Self-Assessment for Indonesia aims at (1) documenting the progress of

REDD+ readiness activities in Indonesia, recording the lesson learned from the process, identifying and a

nalyzing the gaps, and identifying further activities for the transition to IMPLEMENTING result-

based payment, (2) evaluating the progress of REDD+ readiness activities, and (3) providing evidences of

the Government of Indonesia’s commitment on REDD+ implementation agenda.

The scope of REDD+ Readiness Self-Assessment for Indonesia is at a national level; which includes all

main REDD+ readiness activities, e.g. including REDD+ organization and consultation, policy and strategy,

REL, MRV, and safeguards. It also includes all activities funded by FCPF, Indonesia’s development partne

rs, as well as national budget, conducted by various institutions throughout Indonesia.

This document represents a self-assessment process refers to REDD+ Readiness Assessment

Framework Guideline from the FCPF. The REDD+ Readiness Self-Assessment was conducted

through participatory processes of stakeholders representing the REDD+ entities in Indonesia.

Individuals representing the central government, provincial governments, district governments,

communities, forest management units, academia, NGOs, private companies, donors, and other

independent institutions involved to discuss and assess REDD+ readiness implementation in

Indonesia. The assessment was facilitated through the national inception workshops, virtual

surveys to the selected national experts, sub-national workshops in 2 selected provinces (East

Kalimantan and South Sumatra), and the national validation workshop.

The result of the participatory self-assessment indicated that the REDD+ Readiness in Indonesia

is significant, with a lot of major achievements in each component. Component 1 Readiness

Organization and Consultation shows that DGCC has been conducting coordination and

collaboration with other national and international related stakeholders, such as related

ministries and other central government agencies, universities, NGOs, donors, local

governments, private sectors, as well as communities. Ample information sharing has also been

conducted by a number of institutions related to REDD+ programs, activities and projects, both

for national and sub-national level, event for selected site level. Various channels were used to

reach targeted entities, such as film, book, booklet, leaflet, magazine and newspaper, both in

online and printed document, including seminar, workshop, awareness rising, and FGD. However,

“further developments are required” which among others include intensification of coordination

process, capacity building, and the development of feedback and grievance redress mechanism

on REDD+ purpose.

Component 2 REDD+ Strategy Preparation is described as “progressing well, with

further development required”. REDD+ National Strategy is available, but a revision and

particular adjustment are needed to incorporate recent progress in the international climate


agreement. There are also several ongoing policy reforms and enhancement of law enforcement;

such as continuity of one map policy, FLEGT license, moratorium of new permits in peatlands,

social forestry, land tenure reform, customary people recognition, forest fire management, and

establishment of Forest Management Units. In funding instrument and benefit sharing

mechanisms aspect, Indonesia has many initiatives and best practices for REDD+ benefit sharing

mechanisms, vertically and horizontally. Indonesia is now developing a Government Regulation

concerning economic incentive on environment to provide a legal aspect of REDD+ funding

instrument. However, further development is still needed to support REDD+ strategy, among

other: land rights assessment, data management system for emission reduction program, private

sector involvement in low carbon development activities, acceleration of the Government

Regulation development and other statutory laws and related minister technical decrees, as well

as the adjustment and adoption of the existing mechanisms for REDD+ benefit sharing

mechanism.

Component 3 REL has a “significant process”. Indonesia has submitted the Indonesia’s FREL and

now is under technical assessment by UNFCCC. The next challenges are developing standard of

national - sub-national correlation on determining sub-national FREL, and developing

methodology or approach for synchronizing different based year for different purposes.

Component 4 Forest Monitoring System and Safeguards has also a “significant process”. National

Forest Monitoring System (NFMS), Monitoring Reporting and Verification (MRV) system on forest

and carbon, and REDD+ Registry System have been developed. However, the development of

additional PSP’s to reduce uncertainty, improvement of land cover data to detect forest regrowth

and degradation, and the development REDD+ policy to cover leakage and non-permanence are

still needed. Safeguards Information System (SIS) REDD+ has been developed in a highly

participatory way, through a lot of meetings and public consultations by a multi-stakeholder

process, cross-sectoral agencies, related institutions, and experts, as well as in collaboration with

other international partners. In the aspect of social and environmental impact, although

Indonesia has many country initiatives safeguards, due to the World Bank’s environmental and

social safeguard standards, there is urgent need to finalize the SESA and ESMF documents.

The achievement of REDD+ readiness in general is more advanced than MTR 2014. FCPF fund has

been contributed to support REDD+ readiness activities. It was used to fill the gaps and allocated

in the provinces that were not considered attractive to donors. The REDD+ readiness progress

above has provided evidences that the Government of Indonesia committed to REDD+

implementation agenda. Nevertheless, many works still need to be done within various

opportunities to collaborate with Indonesia; through facilitate and expedite technology

development and transfer, payment for performance, technical cooperation, and access to

financial resources to support Indonesia’s climate mitigation and adaptation efforts towards a

climate resilient future.


Table of Content

1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................. 12

2. THE REDD+ READINESS IN INDONESIA .............................................................................................. 14

2.1 Readiness Organization and Consultation ............................................................................. 16

2.1.1 National REDD+ Management Arrangement............................................................. 16

2.1.2. Consultation, Participation, and Outreach ................................................................ 22

2.2 REDD+ Strategy Preparation .................................................................................................. 28

2.2.1 Assessment of Land Use, Land-Use Change Drivers, Forest Law, Policy and Governance ................................................................................................................................... 29

2.2.2 REDD+ Strategy Options ............................................................................................... 33

2.2.3 Implementation Framework ......................................................................................... 36

2.2.4 Social and Environmental Impacts ............................................................................... 39

2.2.5 Funding Instruments and Benefit Sharing Mechanism ................................................ 42

2.3 Reference Levels/Emission Reference Levels ........................................................................ 48

2.4 Forest Monitoring System and Safeguard ............................................................................. 51

2.4.1 National Forest Monitoring System ........................................................................... 51

2.4.2 Information System for Multiple Benefit, Other Impacts, Governance, and Safeguards61

3 GAP ANALYSIS AND WAY FORWARD............................................................................................. 71

4 PARTICIPATORY SELF-ASSESSMENT PROCESS ............................................................................... 81

4.1 Scope and Scale ....................................................................................................................... 81

4.2 Framework .............................................................................................................................. 82

4.3 Processes ................................................................................................................................. 82

4.3.1 Preparing for the Assessment ...................................................................................... 83

4.3.2 Conducting the Assessment ......................................................................................... 89

4.3.3 Communicating the Assessment Outcome .................................................................. 93

5 CONCLUDING REMARKS ................................................................................................................ 95


REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................................... 97

ANNEXES ............................................................................................................................................. 100


List of Figures

Figure 2. 1 Results of REDD+ Readiness Self-Assessment for Indonesia. ................................................... 15

Figure 2. 2 Results of REDD+ Readiness Self-Assessment for East Kalimantan Province. .......................... 16

Figure 2. 3 Results of REDD+ Readiness Self-Assessment for South Sumatra Province. ............................ 16

Figure 2. 4 FCPF Publications for 2011 and 2015. ....................................................................................... 24

Figure 2. 5 The REDD+ Strategy Framework (Source: REDD+ Task Force Indonesia 2012). ....................... 34

Figure 2. 6 A meta concept of BLU mechanism .......................................................................................... 46

Figure 2. 7 Preview of Sistem Monitoring Hutan Nasional (SIMONTANA), the Indonesia’s NFMS. ........... 51

Figure 2. 8 Main tasks and functions of the Directorate of Forest Resources Inventory and Monitoring, Directorate General of Forestry Planning, Ministry of Forestry, Indonesia. .............................................. 53

Figure 2. 9 Historical condition and improvement in establishing the land-cover map of Indonesia that consists of three significant periods. .......................................................................................................... 54

Figure 2.10 The work flow of SIMONTANA in producing an annual nationwide land cover map. ............. 56

Figure 2.11 Web-based Forest Carbon Monitoring System (available at www.puspijak.org). .................. 57

Figure 2.12 Process of Development and Operational of SIS-REDD+. ........................................................ 63

Figure 2.13 The book of SIS-REDD+ of Indonesia. ....................................................................................... 65

Figure 2.14 The performance of SIS-REDD+ of Indonesia in the website. .................................................. 66

Figure 2.15 Institutional structure and SIS REDD+ mechanism. ................................................................. 66

Figure 4.1 Progress indicators. .................................................................................................................... 92

Figure 4.2 Progress indicators, scores, and ranges ..................................................................................... 94


List of Tables

Table 2. 1 Milestone of National REDD+ Management Arrangement ........................................................ 17

Table 2. 2 Current progress of REDD+ Readiness in Indonesia ................................................................... 18

Table 2. 3 Results of Sub-component 1a. National REDD+ Management Arrangements .......................... 20

Table 2. 4 Major REDD+ activities and stakeholders involvement ............................................................. 23

Table 2. 5 Results of Sub-component 1b. Consultation, Participation, and Outreach ............................... 25

Table 2. 6 Results of Component 1. Readiness Organization and Consultation ......................................... 28

Table 2. 7 Results of Component 2. REDD+ Strategy Preparation .............................................................. 29

Table 2. 8 Results of Sub-component 2a. Assessment of Land Use, Land-Use Change Drivers, Forest Law,

Policy and Governance ............................................................................................................................... 30

Table 2. 9 Results of Sub-component 2b. REDD+ Strategy Options ........................................................... 34

Table 2.10 Results of Sub-component 2c. Implementation Framework .................................................... 37

Table 2.11 Results of Sub-component 2d. Social and Environmental Impacts .......................................... 40

Table 2. 12 The role of FCPF on REDD+ readiness in Indonesia .................................................................. 43

Table 2. 13 Results of Sub-component 2e. Funding Instrument and Benefit Sharing Mechanism ............ 47

Table 2. 14 Results of Component 3. Reference Emissions Levels/Reference Levels ................................ 48

Table 2. 15 Results of Criteria in Component 3. Reference Emissions Levels/Reference Levels................ 49

Table 2. 16 Results of Component 4. Monitoring Systems for Forests, and Safeguards ............................ 51

Table 2.17 Results of Sub-component 4a. National/Sub-national Forest Monitoring System ................... 59

Table 2.18 Results of Sub-component 4b. Information System for Multiple Benefits, Other Impacts,

Governance, and Safeguards ...................................................................................................................... 68

Table 3.1 Strengths and weaknesses analysis and proposed strategy to completing the Readiness Phase

....................................................................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

Table 3.2 Timeline and priority setting of improvements ............................. Error! Bookmark not defined.

Table 4.1 Time schedule for developing REDD+ Readiness Self-Assessment Document .................. 83

Table 4.2 Participants of self-assessment .................................................................. 84

Table 4. 3 Component and sub component used in the self assessment .......................... 90

_Toc492414049


Glossary of Abbreviations

AFOCO Asian Forest Cooperation Organization

AMAN Aliansi Masyarakat Adat Nusantara, Archipelago Indigenous People Alliance

AMDAL Analisis Mengenai Dampak Lingkungan, Environmental Impacts Assessment

APBN Anggaran Belanja dan Pendapatan Negara, State Budget and Expenditure System

APIK-Indonesia Ahli Perubahan Iklim dan Kehutanan Indonesia, Indonesian Researcher and Scientists on

Forest and Climate Change Network

Balai PPI dan Karhutla Balai Pengendalian Perubahan Iklim dan Kebakaran Hutan dan Lahan, Climate Change and

Forest and Land Fires Offices (DGCC Regional Office)

Bappenas Badan Perencanaan Pembangunan Nasional, National Development Planning Agency

BAU Business As Usual

BIG Badan Informasi Geospasial, Geospatial Information AgencyS

BKSDA Balai Konservasi Sumber Daya Alam, Natural Resources Conservation Office

BLI Badan Penelitian, Pengembangan, dan Inovasi Kehutanan, Forestry Research,

Development, and Innovation Agency

BLU Badan Layanan Umum, General Services Agency

BPKH Balai Pemantapan Kawasan Hutan, Forest Area Consolidation Office

BRG Badan Restorasi Gambut, Peatland Restoration Agency

BUR Biennial Update Reports

CIFOR Center for International Forestry Research

COP Conference of the Parties

DA Demonstration Activity

DAU Dana Alokasi Umum, General Allocation Funds

DAK Dana Aloksi Khusus, Specific Allocation Funds

DDPI Dewan Daerah Perubahan Iklim, Regional Council on Climate Change

DDPI Kaltim Dewan Daerah Perubahan Iklim Provinsi Kalimantan Timur, East Kalimantan Regional

Council on Climate Change

DFID Department for International Development

DGCC Directorate General Climate Change

DIAS Digital Image Analysis System

DKN Dewan Kehutanan Nasional, National Forestry Council

DNPI Dewan Nasional Perubahan Ikllim, Indonesian National Council on Climate Change

EIA Environmental Impact Assessment

ERPD Emission Reductions Program Document

ESMF Environmental and Social Management Framework

EU European Union

FAO Food and Agriculture Organization

FCPF Forest Carbon Partnership Facility

FCPF-PC Forest Carbon Partnership Facility – Participants Committee

FFI Flora & Fauna International

FIP Forest Investment Program

FLEGT Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade

FMU Forest Management Unit

FOERDIA Forestry and Environment Research, Development, and Innovation Agency


FPIC Free Prior Informed Consent

FRA Forest Resources Assessment

FRM Forest Resources [Change] Monitoring

FREL/FRL Forest Reference Emission Level/Forests Reference Level

FSC Forest Stewardship Council

GHG Green House Gas

GIS Geographic Information System

GIZ Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit

GTZ Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit

HCVF High Conservation Value Forest

ICCTF Indonesia Climate Change Trust Fund

IELH Instrumen Ekonomi Lingkungan Hidup, Environment Economics Instrument

IFCA Indonesia Forest Carbon Alliance

INCAS Indonesia National Carbon Accounting System

IPB Institut Pertanian Bogor, Bogor Agricultural University

ITTO The International Tropical Timber Organization

JICA Japan International Cooperation Agency

KLHS Kajian Lingkungan Hidup Strategi, Strategic Environmental Assessment

KOICA Korea International Cooperation Agency

LAMA-I Locally Appropriate Mitigation Actions in Indonesia

LAPAN Lembaga Penerbangan dan Antariksa Nasional, National Institute of Aeronautics and

Space

LEI Lembaga Ekolabel Indonesia, Indonesian Ecolabel Institute

LULUCF Land Use, Land-Use Change and Forestry

MoEF Ministry of Environment and Forestry

MoF Ministry of Forestry

MoFin Ministry of Finance

MRPP Merang REDD+ Pilot Project

MRV Monitoring, Reporting and Validation

NDC Nationally Determined Contribution

NFI National Forest Inventory

NFMS National Forest Monitoring System

P3SEKPI Pusat Penelitian dan Pengembangan Sosial, Ekonomi, Kebijakan dan Perubahan Iklim,

Research Center for Social, Economy, Forest Policy and Climate Change Development

PCI Principles, Criteria and Indicators

PEP Pemantauan, Evaluasi dan Pelaporan, Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting

PEP GRK Pemantauan, Evaluasi dan Pelaporan Gas Rumah Kaca, GHG Monitoring, Evaluation and

Reporting of GHG

PGI Partnership Governance Index

PHPL Pengelolaan Hutan Produksi Lestari, Sustainable Forest Management and Production

PNPM Program Nasional Pemberdayaan Masyarakat, National Program of Community

Empowerment

PP Peraturan Pemerintah, Government Regulation

PRISAI Prinsip, Kriteria, Indikator Safeguards Indonesia, Indonesian Safeguards Principles, Criteria

and Indicators


PSIS NAS Pengelola Sistem Informasi Safeguards Nasional, National Safeguard Information System

Officer

PSKL Perhutanan Sosial dan Kemitraan Lingkungan, Social Forestry and Environmental

Partnership

PSP Permanent Sample Plot

Pustanling Pusat Standarisasi dan Lingkungan, Center for Standardization and Environment

RAD GRK Rencana Aksi Daerah Penurunan Emisi Gas Rumah Kaca, Provincial Action Plan of GHG

Emission Reduction

RAN GRK Rencana Aksi Nasional Penurunan Emisi Gas Rumah Kaca, National Action Plan of GHG

Emission Reduction

RBS Rights Based Standard

REDD+ Reduction Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation Plus

REDD+ PGA REDD+ Participatory Governance Assessment

REDD+ SES REDD+ Social and Environmental Standards

REL/RL Reference Emission Level/Reference Level

SA Strategic Assessment

SDN Spatial Data Networking

SESA Strategic Environmental and Social Assessment

SFM Sustainable Forest Management

SIMONTANA Sistem Monitoring Hutan Nasional, National Forest monitoring System

SIS Safeguards Information System

SNI Indonesia National Standard

SPIP Sistem Pengendalian Internal Pemerintah, Government Internal Control System

SVLK System for Verification of Timber Legality

TNC The Nature Conservancy

UNDP United Nation Development Programme

UNEP United Nations Environment Programme

UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

UNREDD United Nations Programme on Reduction Emissions from Deforestation and Forest

Degradation

UPT Unit Pelaksana Teknis, Technical Implementation Unit

USGS United States Geological Survey

WRI World Resource Institute

WWF World Wildlife Fund


1. INTRODUCTION

Indonesia is the world’s largest archipelago with massive tropical rainforest areas; rich in biodiversity, carbon stock values, and energy and mineral resources. Its geographic position in the equatorial belt with about 16,000 islands which spans more than 5,000 Km, has made Indonesia vulnerable to the inevitable impacts of climate change. Extreme climatic events and/or disasters, such as floods and droughts, have been more recently seen than they were decades ago. Meanwhile, the rise of sea level –which could inundate coastal areas– remain lurking as long-term impacts, endangering the lives of up to 42 million people living the areas. If not stopped immediately, deforestation and forest degradation will also pose threats against the coastal areas; as more forests are losing their environmental functions as water catchment areas to prevent floods and erosion.

The archipelago is facing multiple challenges where it must balance both ongoing and future development programs as well as priorities to tackle poverty; while coping with issues related with climate change. In 2010, the Indonesian government has stated the commitment to cut 26% emissions from Business As Usual scenario by 2020 (by national efforts) and to cut 41% emissions with the help of international supports. Comprehensive land and ocean-based climate change adaptation and mitigation efforts are implemented to fortify the commitment. The government has also set a more ambitious target – as inscribed in the first Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) – that the unconditional emission reduction target after 2020 will be 29% and that the conditional emission reduction target under BAU scenario is raised to 50% by the year 2030. The NDC outlines the country’s transition towards a low-carbon and more climate resilient future. REDD+ in Indonesia is deemed as an important component of the NDC target from land use sector, as the scheme includes activities with reducing deforestation, reducing forest degradation, enhancing forest carbon stock, conservation initiatives, and forests’ sustainable management – approached by the Sustainable Forest Management (SFM) measures.

Indonesia has been intensively carrying out REDD+ related activities since 2007, aside from being actively involved in international climate change debates and forums. The country has also been conducting preparations for REDD+ scheme within national scope efforts and international supports in the aspects of finance, technology development and technology transfer, as well as capacity building. The country has adopted several REDD+ financing mechanisms –via bilateral, regional, or international cooperation schemes– including the FCPF; which has 2 separate-but-complementary funding mechanisms of the Readiness Fund and the Carbon Fund. The FCPF Readiness Fund supports participating countries to develop REDD+ strategies and policies, reference emission levels; measurement, reporting, and verification systems; and institutional capacity to manage REDD+ including environmental and social safeguards. Meanwhile, the FCPF Carbon Fund designed to pilot performance-based payments for emission reductions from REDD+ programs in FCPF countries.

REDD+ Readiness Self-Assessment on Indonesia became one of the requirements, for the country to take part in the FCPF Carbon Fund scheme. Objectives of REDD+ Readiness Self-Assessment are: (1) documenting the progress of REDD+ readiness activities in Indonesia, recording the lessons learned from the process, identifying and analyzing the challenges, and identifying further activities for the transition towards result-based payment schemes, (2) evaluating the progress of REDD+ readiness activities, and (3) providing evidences about the government’s commitment on REDD+ implementation agenda.

The REDD+ Readiness Self-Assessment for Indonesia implemented throughout a national scope, with case studies taken from sub-national implementation. The scope includes main REDD+ readiness activities such as consultations and strategic preparations, the designing of reference level and monitoring system; as well as cross-sectors issues such as governance, environment, and social safeguards. The assessment also


includes records about activities funded by FCPF and Indonesia’s development partners –as well as activities funded through the national budget– conducted nationwide.

This report divides into 5 chapters of Introduction, Descriptions of REDD+ Readiness in Indonesia, Descriptions of Gap Analysis and Steps Ahead, Methodology for Participatory Self-Assessment, and a Concluding Remark.


2. THE REDD+ READINESS IN INDONESIA

1Paragraph 70 in Decision 1/CP.16 of the Conference of Parties (COP)-16 encouraged developing countries

contributing to climate change mitigation actions in the forest and land-use sector (Land Use, Land-Use

Change and Forestry/LULUCF), by national circumstances. Such mitigation actions are then better known

as REDD+ (Reduction Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation Plus), which includes the

following activities: (a) reducing emissions from deforestation; (b) reducing emissions from forest

degradation; (c) forest carbon stocks conservation; (d) sustainable forest management; and (e)

enhancement of forest carbon stocks.

Paragraph 71 in Decision 1/CP.16 requested developing countries committed to REDD+ (hereinafter

referred to as the REDD+ countries) to conduct REDD+ mechanism in accordance with the convention; to

offer proper supports needed for the mechanism of payment for performance, including financial support

and technology. Agreeing with the decision aforementioned, REDD+ countries need to prepare a series of

the following elements:

1) REDD+ National Strategy or Action Plan.

2) Forest Reference Emission Levels/Forests Reference Levels (FRELs/FRLs).

3) National Forest Monitoring System that is robust and transparent.

4) Safeguards Information System.

As part of the commitment to implement REDD+ scheme as climate mitigation actions, Indonesia is on the

process of completing the four aspects above, to make sure of implementation feasibility on the ground.

Over the years, the country has shown positive achievements such as finalization of the REDD+ National

Strategy in 2012, and the passing of National Forest Reference Emission Level/Forests Reference Level

(FREL/FRL) by UNFCCC Secretariat in 2016. Looking back, the Indonesian government has decades earlier

initiated a National Forest Inventory (NFI) program by pioneering the National Forest Monitoring System

(NFMS) since 1986. Currently, the NFMS implementation managed by the Directorate General of Forest

Planning and Environmental Administration, under the Ministry of Environment and Forestry

(MoEF). Indonesia has also seen developments of Safeguards Information System (SIS) established in

2013, operated through an interactive web-based system (http://sisredd.dephut.go.id/) managed by the

Directorate General of Climate Change (DGCC of MoEF). Yet, this system is still facing an implementation

issue, because Indonesia is still limited on institutional aspect (human resources), the need of high

commitment in provisioning information, and the system requires synergy with other REDD+ safeguards-

related system.

In order to better comprehend the progress of REDD+ preparations, REDD+ Readiness Self-Assessment

for Indonesia (hereinafter addressed as ‘the Assessment’) completed after the REDD+ Readiness

Assessment Framework by the FCPF (hereinafter addressed as ‘FCPF Guideline’)[1]. The Assessment

conducted through four workshops, a virtual survey, and a final assessment by the R-Package Assessment

Team. The four workshops were; Inception Workshop (national level), East Kalimantan Workshop (sub-

[1] FCPC. 2013. A Guide to the FCPF Readiness Assessment Framework. The World Bank. Washington DC.

http://sisredd.dephut.go.id/


national level), South Sumatra Workshop (sub-national level) and Validation Workshop (national level).

The virtual survey completed by six experts in verifying results of Inception Workshop and assessing

the REDD+ nationwide readiness condition; followed by REDD+ Readiness assessment by two of the

experts in their respective provinces (at sub-national level). The final assessment by the R-Package

Assessment Team conducted after analyzing results from Inception Workshop, Virtual Surveys, and

Validation Workshop mentioned; where main considerations in assigning final progress indicators based

on supporting reasons or findings in respective indicator (differentiated in colors).

Based on the self-assessment, the REDD+ Readiness in Indonesia has reached 81.25% at the component level (Figure 2.1); which reflects significance of REDD+ preparations. Achievements highlighted are the green indicator (representing ‘significant progress') in Component 3 of Reference Emissions Level/Reference Levels; and Component 4 of Monitoring Systems for Forests, and Safeguards. Other significant progresses are the yellow indicator (representing ‘progressing well, with further development required’) in Component 2 of REDD+ Strategy Preparation; and orange indicator (signaling ’further development required’ ) in Component 1 of Readiness Organization and Consultation.

The REDD+ Readiness saw a decrease in the lower level, because it refers to the real self-assessment results with details and specific questions derived from workshops. Meanwhile, the higher level shows higher percentage because of the re-assignment of progress indicator to each average of scores from the lower level - based on the range of scores (please refer to Section 4.3.3.1 and Figure 4.4). These results appreciate the efforts conducted in implementing REDD+ activities during the Readiness Phase, both at national and sub-national levels; completed or in progress. Meanwhile, East Kalimantan Province reached a remarkable progress (Figure 2.2) in the process; while South Sumatra Province reached slightly lower progress than the national REDD+ readiness (Figure 2.3).

Component Sub-

Component Criteria

Diagnostic Question

2 4 12 16

1 4 16 31

1 2 8 11

0 0 0 1

Percentage of REDD+ Readiness

81.25% 80% 77.78% 76.27%

Figure 2. 1 Results of REDD+ Readiness Self-Assessment for Indonesia.

Component Sub-

Component Criteria

Diagnostic Question

4 6 15 21


0 3 14 28

0 1 7 10

0 0 0 0


100% 87.5% 80.56% 79.66%

Figure 2. 2 Results of REDD+ Readiness Self-Assessment for East Kalimantan Province.

Component Sub-

Component Criteria

Diagnostic Question

2 4 10 13

1 4 12 28

1 2 12 15

0 0 2 3


81.25% 80% 70.83% 71.61%

Figure 2. 3 Results of REDD+ Readiness Self-Assessment for South Sumatra Province.

The following sub-sections will describe in more details about Indonesia’s preparations, including the

Assessment’s results.

2.1 Readiness Organization and Consultation

2.1.1 National REDD+ Management Arrangement

There are two agencies in the Ministry of Environment and Forestry (MoEF) with mandates related to climate change; the Directorate General of Climate Change (DGCC), and the Center for Research and Development in Social, Economy, Policy, and Climate Change (Pusat Penelitian dan Pengembangan Sosial Ekonomi Kebijakan dan Perubahan Iklim, P3SEKPI).

DGCC leads national REDD+ management and/or arrangement in Indonesia, while P3SEKPI supports in carrying out its mandate. In addition, DGCC also gets support from other Directorate Generals under the MoEF (such as DG of Forest Planology and Environment, DG of Social Forestry and Environmental Partnership, DG of Sustainable Production Forest Management, DG of Natural Resources and Ecosystem Conservation, as well as Forestry and Environment Research Development and Innovation Agency).


DGCC has been conducting coordination and collaboration with other national and international related stakeholders such as Ministry of Agriculture, Ministry of Finance, National Development Planning Agency (Bappenas), National Forestry Council (Dewan Kehutanan Nasional/DKN), Indonesian National Council on Climate Change (Dewan Nasional Perubahan Ikllim/DNPI), universities, NGOs, donors, local governments, private sectors, as well as communities.In the sub-national level (provinces), its function is still in development process; of whether they will be lead by the technical implementation unit (Unit Pelaksana Teknis/UPT) of DGCC or will be lead by the provincial government entities (such as REDD+ Working Group) or other relevant institution established by the Governor. In East Kalimantan, this function led by the East Kalimantan Regional Council on Climate Change (Dewan Daerah Perubahan Iklim Provinsi Kalimantan Timur/DDPI Kaltim); while in South Sumatra, the REDD+ Working Group has taken the lead. Funding supports are also given from various donors (see chapter 2.2.5.). Achievements of the national supports in REDD+ management arrangements and the color-coded progress as presented in Figure 2.4.

Previously, national REDD+ management arrangement carried out by various institutions; DNPI (established on 2008), REDD+ task Force (2010), and REDD+ Agency (2013). The institutions have led coordination process to develop REDD+ infrastructures for Indonesia, along with related ministries, agencies, and institutions. Highlighted points of national REDD+ arrangement can be found in Table 2.1.

Table 2. 1 Milestone of National REDD+ Management Arrangement

Time National Arrangement Description

Nov 30, 2007

First initiative on development of the National Action Plan on Climate Change.

The document served as guidance for all parties in conducting integrated mitigation and adaptation efforts on climate change, initiated by the Ministry of National Development Planning (Bappenas). The document proposed to integrate with the Mid Term and Long Term National Development Plan.

July 4, 2008

Establishment of National Council on Climate Change (Dewan Nasional Perubahan Iklim/DNPI)

DNPI (under Presidential Regulation No. 46/2008) was responsible to co-ordinate climate change management programs, and to strengthen Indonesia's place in international climate change forums. DNPI initiated strategic programs promoting Skema Karbon Nusantara (domestic carbon scheme), carbon market, carbon footprint (Jejak Karbon), and the Pedaling Indonesia (Indonesia Mengayuh) movement.

2008 Mainstreaming Climate Change into Development Planning

The Yellow Book published by Bappenas (the National Planning Agency) served as a multi-sectoral guide for Indonesian governmental agencies in integrating climate change into its overall National Development Plan, by coordinating regulatory efforts to carry out both long and short-term efforts.

May 26, 2009

Indonesia-Norway REDD+ Partnership

The purpose of the Partnership was to give significant reductions in GHG from deforestation, forest degradation and peatland conversion; where Norway supported REDD+ readiness and implementation (selecting pilot province, developing REDD+ National Strategy, establishing REDD+ Agency, developing MRV, funding institution and distribution mechanism).

Sept 3, 2009

Indonesia Climate Change Trust Fund (ICCTF)

ICCTF establishment under the Minister of National Development Planning Decree No. 44/MPPN/HK/09/2009; aimed to enhance national coordination on climate change-related grands/funds management.


Time National Arrangement Description

Sept 25, 2009

Indonesia’s commitment on Emission Reduction

Indonesia devised an energy mix policy including LULUCF (Land Use, Land-Use Change, and Forestry) that will reduce emissions by 26% by 2020 from BAU (Business As Usual), and 41% with international support. President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono stated the commitment at G20 meeting in Pittsburg on September 2009.

Sept 20, 2010

REDD+ Task Force REDD+ Task Force (established under Presidential Decree No. 19/2010) developed REDD+ National Strategy, prompting issuance Presidential Instruction No. 10/2011 about new logging permits moratorium and forest governance improvement in primary forest and peatland, and selected as also prepared Central Kalimantan Province as a REDD+ pilot province.

2011 Forest Carbon Partnership Facility (FCPF)

FCPF established to support a select subset of strategic analytic inputs and a consultative process. The FCPF grant has four main components of analytic work, support of readiness process, REL and MRV, and Regional data collection and capacity building.

Sept 20, 2011

National Action Plan of GHG Emission Reduction (Rencana Aksi Nasional Penurunan Emisi Gas Rumah Kaca/RAN GRK)

RAN-GRK was an established guidance for Ministries, Agencies, local government, private companies, and communities; to plan, conduct, and evaluate their action plans of emission reduction. RAN-GRK proposed mitigation actions on five priority sectors of agriculture, forestry and peatland, energy and transportation, industry, and waste management.

Dec 20, 2012

Natural resources and environment law enforcement by “Multidoor approach”

"Multidoor approach" is a law enforcement method on integrated violations of environment and natural resources in forest and peatland - by abusing various regulations in fields such as environment, forestry, spatial planning, estate, mining, tax, corruption, and money laundring.

Aug 31, 2013

Development of REDD+ Agency

REDD+ Agency set under Presidential Regulation No. 62/2013. The mandate was to conduct management, implementation, monitoring, and control of REDD+ mechanism in Indonesia. FREL for Indonesia was one of the result of coordination process led by REDD+ Agency.

2015 Directorate General of Climate Change (DGCC) under the Ministry of Environment and Forestry

DGCC (established under Presidential Regulation No. 16/2015) has continued REDD+ Agency to lead cross sectoral/ministries coordination, such as Ministry of Agriculture, DNPI, Planning Agency, Ministry of Finance, BRG, etc. At sub-national level, REDD+ co-ordinated by provincial government entity (REDD+ Working Group or other relevant institutions established by the Governor) or DGCC local office.

Furthermore, Indonesia REDD+ readiness progress until 2016 can be classified on five aspects of policy

and regulation, REL, MRV, funding and benefit sharing, and safeguard. Main achievements of each aspect

is presented in Table 2.2.

Table 2. 2 Current progress of REDD+ Readiness in Indonesia


Aspect Main achievement

Policy and regulation

• * REDD+ National Strategy is available • * Ongoing policy reforms and enhancement of law enforcement: continuity of one map

policy, FLEGT license, moratorium of new permits in peatlands, social forestry (12.7 million ha target) for communities, land reallocation/land tenure reform (9.2 million ha target), legal recognition to the rights of indigenous people, transformation in forest and land fire management from focusing on suppression to prevention, budget tagging policy, new vision of the government (nawa cita) to reform environmental governance, establishment of Local REDD+ Agency, Forest Management Units (FMU) will be the main intervention for REDD+ implementation

REL • Submission of Indonesia’s FREL (currently under technical assessment ) • Establishment of REL Province in SRAP (Strategi dan Rencana Aksi Provinsi, Provincial Strategic and

Action Plan) document

MRV • NFMS developed • Ministry Regulation on MRV (design for a national MRV system) • SIGN (Sistem Inventarisasi Gas Rumah Kaca Nasional, National Green House Gases Inventory

System) • Registry system launched

Funding and benefit sharing

• Fund for REDD+ in Indonesia (FREDDI) designed • Funding for result based is available through carbon fund • Initiative of regional incentives mechanism • Development of the Government Regulation concerning economic incentive on environment • Best practices as a benchmark for REDD+ benefit sharing mechanism are available

Safeguard • Principles, Criteria and Indicators for REDD+ Safeguards in Indonesia (PRISAI) has been developed

and adopted in a highly participatory way, through a lot of meetings and public consultations by

multi-stakeholders process, cross-sectoral agencies, related institutions, and experts, as well as in

collaboration with other international partners.

• Safeguards Information System have been developed and operated

• The initiative of Strategic Environmental and Social Assessment (SESA) has developed by National Forestry Council (DKN), but it should be completed together with ESMF as soon as possible.

Table 2.3 shows that only criteria 2 (Operating mandate and budget) has reached a ‘significant progress’ - as marked with the color green.Under a clear mandate, DGCC obtains its own budget from the National Budget and Expenditure System Anggaran Belanja dan Pendapatan Negara / APBN); where for accountability and transparency, DGCC also provides an online platform at http://ditjenppi.menlhk.go.id/. DGCC has launched a Registry System in 1 November 2016. Meanwhile, the feedback and grievance mechanism in Indonesia still need further development as the system is still in its early stage of development; as evidence on the mechanism implementation is still considered insufficient, especially about communities affected. Currently, the Directorate of Conflict Management, under the Directorate General of Social Forestry and Environmental Partnership (Perhutanan Sosial dan Kemitraan Lingkungan/PSKL) under MoEF responsible in conflict resolution and grievance mechanism. It is the only existing division to handle feedback and grievance on certain topics, but not for other issues like forest and land fire, land conflict, etc. A further development of feedback and grievance mechanism is prepared to complete by 2019.

http://ditjenppi.menlhk.go.id/


Several actions and networks have been set to help the consultation and participation of various stakeholders in the REDD+ readiness process for both national and sub-national networks. As an example, the Indonesian Researcher and Scientists on Forest and Climate Change Network (APIK-Indonesia) has been established as a scientific network which provides scientific support for Indonesia’s climate change issues including development of REDD+. A network of implementers in district level has also been built at several areas in Indonesia.

Table 2. 3 Results of Sub-component 1a. National REDD+ Management Arrangements

1a. National REDD+ Management Arrangement.

Criteria Diagnostic Question Evidence

1. Accountability and transparency.

How do national REDD+ institutions and management arrangements demonstrate they are operating in an open, accountable and transparent manner?

Directorate General of Climate Change (DGCC) was established under the Ministry of Environment and Forestry, and the institutional mechanisms, planning, monitoring, and evaluation mechanisms were developed since 2014. DGCC has been regularly issuing annual report, and regularly audited by internal and external independent auditors. The website is available, but still need improvements where the contents need to stay updated regularly. Registry system (monitoring and evaluation) for REDD+ related with accountability is under development. To operate in open, accountable and transparent manners in performing its duties and functions related to REDD+, DGCC communicates and co-ordinates with various parties by referring to the mandate (MoEF Regulation No. P.18/2015).

2. Operating mandate and budget.

How to measure that national REDD+ institutions operate under mutually supportive mandates with adequate, predictable, and sustainable budgets?

As a national REDD+ institution, DGCC operates under clear mutually supportive mandates under the Presidential Regulation No. 16/2015. There is predictable and sustainable budget provided from National Budget and Expenditure System (Anggaran Pendapatan dan Belanja Negara/APBN) of US$ 67.61 billion for 2015-2019, along with donor fundings (bilateral and multinational partners, including FCPF) of US$ 1,2 billion.

Notes:

- DGCC Strategic Plan 2015-2019, available at http://ditjenppi.menlhk.go.id.

- Presidential Regulation No. 16/2015 concerning the Ministry of Environment and Forestry. Available at http://ditjenppi.menlhk.go.id/reddplus/images/resources/peraturan/Perpres_16_Tahun_2015-KLHK.pdf.

- http://ditjenppi.menlhk.go.id/index.php/unit-pelaksana-teknis/pengantar-upt

http://ditjenppi.menlhk.go.id/reddplus/images/resources/peraturan/Perpres_16_Tahun_2015-KLHK.pdf



http://ditjenppi.menlhk.go.id/index.php/unit-pelaksana-teknis/pengantar-upt





3. Multisector coordination mechanisms and cross-sector collaboration.

How do national REDD+ institutions and management arrangements ensure REDD+ activities are being coordinated, integrated into and influencing the broader national or sector policy frameworks (e.g. agriculture, environment, natural resources management, infrastructure development and land-use planning)?

DGCC is a national institution set to deal with climate change, including REDD+ activities. Since 2015, DGCC Has been conducting coordinating activities, integrating and influencing broader national or sector policy frameworks (e.g. agriculture, natural resources management, infrastructure development and land-use planning). However, constant improvements of coordination in both national and sub-national levels are expected.

4. Technical supervision capacity.

How effective and efficient are national REDD+ institutions and management arrangements in leading and supervising multisector readiness activities, including the regular supervision of technical preparations?

DGCC consists of 218 officers in national and local offices to lead and supervise REDD+ readiness activities. However, more officers are still needed to reach the ideal number of DGCC personnel; 81 officers for national office, and 226 officers for local offices. In addition, there are also 1,755 personnel of Manggala Agni (Fire Rescue team) across Indonesia who support forest fire management. To improve their technical capacities, further capacity building developments are needed.

http://ditjenppi.menlhk.go.id/index.php/unit-pelaksana-

teknis/pengantar-upt

5. Funds management capacity.

How do institutions and arrangements demonstrate effective, efficient and transparent fiscal management, including coordination with other development partner-funded activities?

DGCC has an internal finance division which manages allocated national budgets for REDD+, as well as donor funds. The finance division has had extensive experiences with development partners such as bilateral or multilateral partners. Under the Ministry of Finance, the government implements an auditing system which includes internal and external independent auditors to ensure control on effective and efficient fiscal management. Notes:

- http://ditjenppi.menlhk.go.id/program

6. Feedback and grievance redress mechanism.

a. What are the evidence to show that the mechanism operating at the national, sub-national and local levels, is transparent, impartial, and portrays a clearly defined mandate with proper ability and resources?

Ministry of Forestry houses a division to deal with feedback and grievance, with focuses related with forest and land fire, land conflict, etc. The specific system of feedback and handling complaints, as well as tools and mechanisms for REDD+ throughout the country is under development. DGCC is currently designing the Government Internal Control System (Sistem Pengendalian Internal Pemerintah/SPIP) which serves as an ongoing compliance for quality management standard (ISO 9001). In addition, all projects and REDD+ Demonstration Activities in Indonesia provide feedback and grievance and/or compensation mechanism in respective area/region.



http://ditjenppi.menlhk.go.id/program




Notes:

- Link for complaint on hot spot and forest fire:

http://sipongi.menlhk.go.id/home/main

- Link for complains on land tenure conflict: http://pskl.menlhk.go.id/pktha/pengaduan/frontend/web/index.php?r=site%2Ftatacara

b. What are the evidence that potentially impacted communities are aware of, have access to, and the mechanism is responsive to feedback and grievances?

There have been very little feedbacks and grievance and/or compensation proposal/s from impacted communities. But, some evidences showed that the impacted communities are aware of and have access to the system, and the mechanism is responsive to feedback and grievance. The Forest Fire Community Forum (Masyarakat Peduli Api) stands as an example on how villagers surrounding production forest and conservation forest areas are aware about forest fire reporting and management system. Another example is the monitoring and evacuation system developed by TNC and Forclime for villages under the Berau Forest Carbon Program in Berau District, East Kalimantan Province.

Various consultation processes have contributed to developing REDD+ policies. A national consultation

protocol developed by National Forestry Council (Dewan Kehutanan Nasional/DKN) has served as an

information base for all consultation processes. One of the examples of stakeholder engagement in

decision-making process is the development process of SIS-REDD+ as one of the elements required for full

implementation of REDD+. The SIS-REDD+ development aims to translate safeguards for REDD+ -

as agreed in COP 16 Decisions- into national context. The SIS-REDD+ developed through

an analytic process on policy instruments and other instruments related to safeguards for REDD+. The

development process of the SIS-REDD+ also includes developments of most suitable structure and

mechanism for safeguards information provision system of REDD+ for Indonesia.

2.1.2. Consultation, Participation, and Outreach

Before 2014, information sharing took place by DNPI, REDD+ Task Force, REDD+ Agency, as well as related

government institutions such as Bappenas, Ministry of Forestry (including Pustanling, FORDA), and

Ministry of Environment. Afterwards, an information-sharing scheme then conducted by a number of

institutions related to REDD+ programs, activities and projects. Local governments have also involved

in REDD+ information sharing together with central government, NGOs, and Indonesia’s development

partners. After 2014, information sharing has been mainly conducted by DGCC, and other related entities

at national level, as well as NGO, support by a number of development partners and donors.

http://sipongi.menlhk.go.id/home/main

http://pskl.menlhk.go.id/pktha/pengaduan/frontend/web/index.php?r=site%2Ftatacara

http://pskl.menlhk.go.id/pktha/pengaduan/frontend/web/index.php?r=site%2Ftatacara


During REDD+ preparation phase, Indonesia has involved many stakeholders in its process. The

stakeholders’ involvement of some key REDD+ activities is presented in Table 2.4.

Table 2. 4 Major REDD+ activities and stakeholder involvement

Activity Periode of consultation and participation process

Stakeholders involved Provinces involved

REDD+ Strategy Development

2011-2012 REDD+ Agency, NGO, academicians, local governments,

34 Provinces

FREL development 2014-2016 REDD+ Agency, DGCC, DG Plan, NGO (WWF, TNC, FFI, WRI, CI), Ministry of Agriculture, CIFOR, ICRAF, FORDA, IPB, UNDP,

National only

SIS-REDD+ development 2011-2016 Pustanling, DGCC, KSDAE, Satgas REDD+, DNPI, FOERDIA, NGO (AMAN, Daemeter Consulting), Ministry of Agriculture, CIFOR, ICRAF, IPB, CCROM

East Kalimantan, South Sumatera, West Kalimantan

NDC development 2015-now National Planning Agency, MoEF, NGO’s, ITB, 34 provinces, all ministries,

34 provinces

An information sharing system applied both for national and sub-national levels, and even for selected

site level. Information shared consists of general information about REDD+ and climate change, policy and

strategy, REL and MRV, funding and benefit sharing, and social and environmental safeguards. Various

channels have been used to reach targeted entities, such as in the forms of film, book, booklet, leaflet,

magazine and newspaper, both in online and printed document. Other means of information sharing used

are seminar, workshop, awareness rising, and FGD. Active REDD+ projects in Indonesia that contributed

to useful information sharing and consultative process are listed at Annex 5.


Figure 2. 4 FCPF Publications for 2011 and 2015.

FCPF has also published outreach materials in digital and print media (Figure 2.4). For instance, to develop

PSP, FCPF has published books, booklets, leaflets, training, and developed the database system. This

contribution has increase the understanding of REDD+ at all levels. Indonesia is an archipelago country

consisting of 34 provinces and 514 districts or municipalities. The communication and outreach processes

have been conducted by Indonesia – supported by FCPF and other funding sources – but it needed to be

continued to reach more layer of communities, groups, sectors, and stakeholders, by conducting multi-

layers participation and outreach strategy. Improving advocacy approach on dissemination strategy has

become the challenge to enhance the implementation of policy.

Although several efforts have been conducted for consultation, participation, and outreach, it is revealed

in the Assessment that participation of multi-stakeholders has limited number with less growth (Table

2.5). Participation, engagement, and consultation processes have been done, both in national and Sub-

national levels. However, due to the limitations of technology, the width of the area, and the complexity

of the stakeholders, it required a more effective communication strategy. Meanwhile, guidelines for

conducting such processes are needed. In term of information sharing, accessibility of information, as

well as implementation and publication and/or dissemination of consultation outcomes are ‘progressing

with further development needed’. Transparency, consistency, frequent exchange, and dissemination of


information are in place, but have not reached all levels of entities. Due to limited infrastructure and

technology throughout Indonesia, the number of participants who can access such information are

limited.

Table 2. 5 Results of Sub-component 1b. Consultation, Participation, and Outreach

Sub-component 1b. Consultation, Participation, and Outreach.

Criteria Diagnostic Questions Evidence

1. Participation and

engagement of key

stakeholders.

a. How is the full, effective and

on-going participation of key

stakeholders demonstrated

through institutional

mechanisms, including extra

efforts to engage

marginalized groups, such as

forest-dependent women,

youth, Indigenous Peoples

and local communities?

Multi-stakeholders–such as villagers, forest

management units, logging companies, district forestry

offices, and other groups–are participating in many

REDD+ readiness, mitigation measures, and SFM

activities conducted by central and local governments,

as well as NGOs. REDD+ Task Forces in sub-national

level accommodate this participation mechanism.

However, wider participation by specific groups and

multilayers of community, such as woman, youth, and

local communities, is still needed.

b. What are the participatory

mechanisms being used to

ensure Indigenous People

and forest-dependent

communities have the

capacity to effectively

participate in REDD+

readiness and

implementation?

There are many initiatives of formal and informal

participatory mechanism at the central and local

government, such as public consultations, REDD+ task

forces, parties network, forums, etc. There are also

participatory mechanisms conducted with projects and

REDD+ Demonstration Activities at local level. But more

innovative method to cover all relevant entities

throughout Indonesia is still needed.

To promote inclusive and transparent consultation

involving vulnerable groups, including indigenous

people, forest dependent communities, women, and

youth, Indonesia has developed strategies:

- Coordinating with local government agencies and

NGOs

- Establish provincial and district REDD+ working

groups

- Establish of climate change network at local level

2. Consultation

processes.

a. What evidences that

demonstrate the

consultation processes at the

national and local levels are

clear, inclusive, transparent,

and facilitate timely access to

information in a culturally

appropriate form?

There are many consultation processes on national and

local levels in various REDD+ readiness activities, such

as developing REDD+ National/Sub-National Strategy,

FREL development process, MRV system, environment

and social safeguards identification, etc. The

consultation processes involving the key and relevant

stakeholders on national and Sub-national levels. FCPF’s

guidance for conducting public consultation is also

available.

Note:




REDD+ National Strategy, issued by REDD+ Task Force

on 2012. Available at http://www.satgasreddplus.org/

b. What evidence that showed

the country has used a self-

selection process to identify

rights holders and

stakeholders during

consultations?

The MoEF coordinates with other ministries and

agencies to conduct a self-selection process at national

level, in order to determine the relevant stakeholders

for consultation process. While self-selection process at

Sub-national level conducted by the MoEF, assisted by

District or Provincial Forestry Service and other local

agencies.

Note:

- The Minister of Forestry Regulation No.

P.30/Menhut-II/200930 /Menhut-II/20092009

regarding the Procedure for REDD (Tata Cara

Pengurangan Emisi dari Deforestasi dan Degradasi

Hutan (REDD).

- The Minister of Forestry Regulation No.

P.36/Menhut-II/2009 regarding the Procedure of

Carbon Sink and Removal of Business Permit in the

Protection and Production Forests.

c. What evidence supports

Indigenous People

institutions and decision-

making processes are utilized

to enhance consultations and

engagement?

There were some initiatives of indigenous people

engagement in consultation process. Archipelago

Indigenous People Alliance (Aliansi Masyarakat Adat

Nusantara/AMAN), as a formal institution at national

and some provincial levels, as well as informal

indigenous people institution at village level, have

participate and engaged in REDD+ consultation

processes. In order to enhance the quality of

consultation and engagement process, the national and

Sub-national mechanisms need to be improved.

d. What evidence is there that

consultation processes are

gender sensitive and

inclusive?

MoEF has implemented a process of gender

mainstreaming in forestry sector. Since 2014, the

Gender Mainstreaming Working Group of MoEF is

cooperating with Forclime regarding the integration of

gender mainstreaming into the Forestry Strategic Plan

2015-2019, developing responsive gender forestry and

climate change program, implementing and

documenting the data from the gender mainstreaming

model in the pilot areas in Kalimantan and Sumatra.

However, the expansion of gender inclusive

consultation process to reach a wide range of entities in

Indonesia is still needed. Specific reports and

dissemination on gender inclusive consultation process

are also needed.

3. Information

sharing and

a. How have national REDD+

institutions and management

DGCC Strategic Plan has provided an information

sharing mechanism from national to Sub-national and

http://www.satgasreddplus.org/




accessibility of

information.

arrangements demonstrated

transparent, consistent,

comprehensive and timely

sharing and dissemination of

information related to all

readiness activities, including

the development of REDD+

strategy, reference levels,

and monitoring systems, in a

culturally appropriate form?

local level. There is a transparent, consistent and

publication and/or dissemination of information

including all readiness activities, such as the

development of national/Sub-national REDD+ strategy,

reference levels, and monitoring systems. The

expansion of publication strategy is needed in order to

cover all levels of entities and multilayers of

communities.

b. What evidence is there that

information is accessible to

stakeholders (e.g. in a format

and language understandable

to them) and is being

received?

Even though there are many publication and/or

dissemination activities are being used, the

stakeholders in some regions in Indonesian can not

access all the information.

Explaining REDD+ activities to diverse groups with with

different levels of education has been a big challenge.

c. What channels of

communications are being

used to ensure that

stakeholders are well

informed, especially those

who have limited or no access

to relevant information?

Several channels of communications are being used to

ensure the stakeholders are well informed, including

counseling and community awareness raising programs,

public consultations, booklets, leaflets, brochures,

national and local newspapers and magazines, radio

and television programs, and internet. Making sure that

certain communication media can reach the right type

of stakeholders has become the real challenge.

Notes:

Web based such as: http://ditjenppi.menlhk.go.id/;

http://www.satgasreddplus.org/; Indonesia also used

the structural mechanism through REDD+ Task Force at

national and Sub-national (provincials and districts)

levels.

4. Implementation

and public

disclosure of

consultation

outcomes.

How are the outcomes of

consultations integrated in

management arrangements,

strategy development and

technical activities related to

reference level and monitoring

and information systems

development?

There are quite outcomes of consultations integrated in

management arrangements, strategy development and

technical activities related to Reference Level and

monitoring information system development. For

instance, Indonesia’s FREL was a result of long run

consultation integration process involving key and

relevant stakeholders throughout the country led by

REDD+ Agency. Another example is the NFMS as a

result of long run consultation and improvement

process involving many stakeholders led by MoEF.

The progress explained above can also be seen in the Assessment conclusion, which showed that ‘further

developments are required’ (orange) for Readiness Organization and Consultation (Table 2.6). The sub-

component of National REDD+ Management Arrangements has been progressing well (yellow). However,




the sub-component of Consultation, Participation and Outreach is still facing some challenges, especially

with the participation and engagement of key stakeholders and consultation processes.

Table 2. 6 Results of Component 1. Readiness Organization and Consultation

Component Sub-component

1. Readiness Organization and

Consultation a. National REDD+ Management Arrangements

b. Consultation, Participation, and Outreach

Meanwhile on the Sub-national level, self-assessment conducted by stakeholders in East Kalimantan

Province resulted in ‘significant progress’ (green) for Component 1, with ‘significant progress’ (green)

progress for sub-component 1a and ‘progressing with further development needed’ (yellow) progress for

sub-component 1b (Annex 2). South Sumatra Province has reached ‘require further development’

(orange) for component 1 and both sub-components (Annex 3).

2.2 REDD+ Strategy Preparation

REDD+ National Strategy was established through several processes, with the involvement of various

stakeholders and relevant institutions. The efforts of building a National REDD+ Strategy in Indonesia

started with the domestic initiative for bolstering REDD+ program after COP 13 in Bali in 2007. The

Indonesia Forest Carbon Alliance (IFCA) Project pioneered the early report on formulating a REDD+

Readiness Phase, including the need for REDD+ National Strategy (FORDA, 2008). The process then

continued within the Ministry of Forestry, with support from UN-REDD+ Project. Ministry of Planning was

also involved in the REDD+ National Strategy establishment. In 2010, the REDD+ Task Force was

established, with integrate these two documents into one document that accepted by each party as one

of their missions. The process of establishing the REDD+ National Strategy was continued with forming a

small team in the REDD+ Task Force to assess and integrate the existing document. Some of the team

members were supported and financed by WB-managed budget. Consultation processes were conducted

from February to April 2011, before the National REDD+ Strategy was published in June 2012 at national

and Sub-national levels.

The implementation of National REDD+ Strategy started in 2013, with the establishment of Badan

Pengelola REDD+ (BPREDD+/REDD+ Agency), an independent government body that exclusively manage

REDD+. Most of the action plan and strategic approach, including mainstreaming the Forest Management

Unit for better forest management at site level, written within the applied National Strategy. Due to the

change in government administration, REDD+ Agency had to integrate with the Directorate General

Climate Change (DGCC), under the Ministry of Environment and Forestry (MoEF). DGCC has become the

key institution that deals with climate change in Indonesia, and all aspects related with climate change–

including REDD+ scheme–fall under the jurisdiction of this institution. All preparation and products related

to REDD+, during Readiness Phase under the REDD+ Agency and the National Council of Climate Change

(Dewan Nasional Perubahan Iklim/DNPI), were transferred into this institution for further progress. As the


successor of the REDD+ Agency, the DGCC became the key institution in Indonesia that coordinates the

planning, monitoring, and reporting of all climate change issues and obligations to international forum, as

National Focal Point for climate change issue for Indonesia.

Table 2. 7 Results of Component 2. REDD+ Strategy Preparation


2. REDD+ Strategy Preparation

a. Assessment of Land Use, Land-Use Change Drivers, Forest Law, Policy and Governance

b. REDD+ Strategy Options

c. Implementation Framework

d. Social and Environmental Impacts

e. Funding Instrument and Benefit Sharing Mechanism

The Assessment concluded that Component 2 of REDD+ Strategy Preparation is ‘progressing with

further development needed’ (Table 2.7), as the result from ‘significant progress’ on sub-component 2a

regarding Assessment of Land Use, Land-Use Change Drivers, Forest Law, Policy and Governance and sub-

component 2b regarding REDD+ Strategy Options. Sub-component 2c regarding Implementation

Framework ‘require further development’, while sub-component 2d about Social and Environmental

Impacts, and 2e about Funding Instrument and Benefit Sharing Mechanism are ‘progressing with

further development needed’. This Assessment result also supported by the progress in selected sub-

national levels, e.g. East Kalimantan Province (Annex 2) and South Sumatra Province (Annex 3). The

following subsections will briefly describe the progress from each sub-component under the Component

2 of REDD+ Strategy Preparation.

2.2.1 Assessment of Land Use, Land-Use Change Drivers, Forest Law, Policy and Governance

Work related with land use, drivers of changes in land-use, reference level, forest carbon stock calculation,

enhancement, and monitoring–including assessment and analysis–are the most among all REDD+

instrument. But here are still some limitations in the progress related with forest law, policy and

governance (Table 2.8).

There are ample analysis and assessment on land use, drivers of changes in land-use, policy and

governance. The first official comprehensive analysis was provided by IFCA 2007 Consolidation Report

(MoF, 2008). The IFCA report was led by the Ministry of Forestry, who coordinated the contribution from

national and international experts, such as the Ministry of Forestry itself, the World Bank, DFID, APCO,

Australian Department of Climate Change, CERINDO, CIFOR, ODI, Ecosecurities, GTZ, ICRAFT, Max Planck

Institute, South Dakota State University, TNC, URS, Wetland International, World Resources Institute, and

WWF. the infrastructure for REDD in Indonesia, deforestation and forest degradation analysis, land-use

change, as well as forest governance. The report consists of the infrastructure for REDD in Indonesia,

deforestation and forest degradation analysis, land-use change, as well as forest governance.

To follow up IFCA Consolidation Report and update the information for REDD+ readiness in Indonesia,

both central and local governments, NGOs and private institutions have conducted various assessments

and analysis. Demonstration Activities and REDD+ related projects in Indonesia also conducted


assessment regarding land-use changes, forest laws, policy and governance for the purpose of their

project implementation, as well as to support broader purposes beyond projects. FCPF has also

contributed to several analytic works since 2011 (although the FCPF Indonesia stated since 2010, in

practice it run effectively end of 2011 due to administration arrangement), e.g. analysis of deforestation

drivers from a development perspective, land use demands, and demographics development;

identification of priority investments required to reduce deforestation and forest degradation;

identification of activities resulted in reducing emission and increasing removals, etc. The results of these

analytic works are accessible on digital and printing media, have been disseminated to relevant

stakeholders (the analysis result, among other, available on:

http://puspijak.org/uploads/buku/Dynamic.pdf). FCPF funded analysis support the REDD+

implementation in several provinces, such as East Kalimantan, South Sumatera, and Papua. In recent years,

new information for Indonesia has been produced by the Ministry of Forestry, that enables improvements

in estimation of emissions levels throughout the country. Systematic monitoring of change in forest cover

over longer time frame and updated land cover mapping are included in the new information. Based on

this information and relevant published data, a first-order calculation of the emissions from loss of forest

cover in 2000-2005 was performed to develop an improved basis for setting a REL for REDD.

The analysis results were mostly used to prioritize the key direct and indirect drivers, to be addressed by

the programs and policies in the REDD+ Strategy. For the most part, the analysis considered the major

barriers to forest carbon stock enhancement activities to be addressed by the programs and policies that

are included in the REDD+ Strategy. There are identification results of systematic links between key drivers

and/or barriers to the appropriate forest carbon stock enhancement activities and REDD+ activities, that

already integrated in the REDD+ Strategy.

Table 2. 8 Results of Sub-component 2a. Assessment of Land Use, Land-Use Change Drivers, Forest Law,

Policy and Governance

Sub-component 2a. Assessment of Land Use, Land-Use Change Drivers, Forest Law,

Policy and Governance.


11. Assessment and analysis.

Does the summary of the work

conducted during R-PP

formulation and preparation

present an analysis of recent

historical land-use trends,

assessment of relevant land

tenure and titling, natural

resource rights, livelihoods,

forest law, policy and

governance issues?

There are ample analysis and assessment on land use,

drivers of changes on land-use, policy and governance.

IFCA 2007 Consolidation Report was the first

comprehensive analysis for REDD+ policy, followed by

other analysis conducted by the government, NGOs, and

private institutions, as well as Indonesia’s development

partners both collaboratively or separately.

Note:

http://www.unredd.net/documents/un-redd-partner-

countries-181/asia-the-pacific-333/a-p-partner-

countries/indonesia-187/national-un-redd-programme-

management-including-tors-2778/studies-publications-

resources-by-other-initiatives-1543/studies-and-

http://puspijak.org/uploads/buku/Dynamic.pdf





publications-on-redd-1676/1027-indonesia-2008-ifca-

consolidation-report-1027.html

MoF, 2008. Reducing Emission from Deforestation and

Forest Degradation in Indonesia. IFCA 2007 Consolidation

Report. Ministry of Forestry. Jakarta.

Submission by Indonesia, National FREL for Deforestation

and Forest Degradation. Available at

http://ditjenppi.menlhk.go.id/pustaka-djppi

http://www.redd-

indonesia.org/index.php/publikasi/daftar-

publikasi/12914-forest-and-land-use-governance-in-a-

decentralized-indonesia-a-legal-and-policy-review

12. Prioritization of

direct and indirect

drivers/barriers to

forest carbon

stock

enhancement.

a. How was the analysis used to

prioritize key direct and

indirect drivers, to be

addressed by the programs

and policies included in the

REDD+ strategy?

The results of analysis from central government, local

governments, research agencies, NGOs, and other

institutions–both published and unpublished analytic

works–were mostly used to prioritize key direct and

indirect drivers to be addressed by the programs and

policies in the REDD+ strategy. Public consultations,

workshops, seminars, Focus Group Discussions, and other

techniques were used to ensure the priority programs.

Note:

- REDD+ National Strategy, issued by REDD+ Task Force

on 2012. Available at

http://bpredd.reddplusid.org/program/strategi-

nasional-redd

- Submission by Indonesia, National FREL for

Deforestation and Forest Degradation. Available at

http://ditjenppi.menlhk.go.id/pustaka-djppi.

b. Did the analysis consider the

major barriers to forest

carbon stock enhancement

activities to be addressed by

the programs and policies in

the REDD+ strategy?

The analysis mostly considered the major barriers to forest

carbon stock enhancement activities to be addressed by

the programs and policies included in the REDD+ strategy.

The opportunity cost or abatement cost are included in

the considerations.

13. Links between

drivers/barriers

and REDD+

activities.

What evidence demonstrates

that systematic links between

key drivers, barriers to forest

carbon stock enhancement

activities, and REDD+ activities

were identified?

There are identification results of systematic links

between key drivers, barriers to forest carbon stock

enhancement activities (as appropriate), and REDD+

activities are already integrated in the REDD+ Strategy,

and some of them have been implemented. One of the

examples is deforestation on peatland forest, which is key

driver, links to the peatland restoration program. Another

example is forest fire, which also a key driver, links to

improvement program on forest fire management system.


http://www.redd-indonesia.org/index.php/publikasi/daftar-publikasi/12914-forest-and-land-use-governance-in-a-decentralized-indonesia-a-legal-and-policy-review




http://bpredd.reddplusid.org/program/strategi-nasional-redd







14. Action plans to address natural resource rights, land tenure, governance.

Do action plans to make

progress in short, medium and

long-term towards addressing

relevant issues, land-use, land


resource rights, livelihoods, and

governance issues in priority

regions related to specific REDD+

programs, outline further steps

and identify required resources?

Yes, REDD+ National and Sub-national Strategy is a basic

instrument of national and provincial action plan. For

further implementation agenda, there are detailed action

plans to make progress in the short, medium and long-

term, related to Ministries and Agencies at national level,

and related to Local Government Agencies at Sub-national

level. They outline further steps and identifies required

resources, such as human resource, technology, and fund.

REDD+ National Strategy needed to be adjusted due to

institutional changes, and the ratification made by the GoI

in relation to NDC. Some of REDD+ Sub-national Strategies

also needed to be improved, as it happens in West

Kalimantan Province.

Note:

REDD+ National Strategy, issued by REDD+ Task Force on

2012. Available at http://www.satgasreddplus.org/

15. Implications for

forest law and

policy.

Does the assessment identify

implications for forest or other

relevant law and policy in the

long-term?

The assessment identified implications for forest or other

relevant law and policy in the short and medium-term

periods. The extension of logging ban in peatland forest

and the one map policy are the policy implications, due to

driver identification and assessment. In the past year, the

government issued Minister Regulations No.

P.32/Menlhk/Setjen/Kum.1/3/2016 concerning the

Management of Forest and Land Fire, as well as No.

P.84/Menlhk/Setjen/Kum.1/11/2016 concerning Climate

Village Program.

The Assessment identified a number of implications for forest or other relevant laws and policies in the

short- and medium-term periods only. The extension of logging ban in peatland forest and the one map

policy are the policy implications due to driver identification and assessment. In past year, the Ministry of

Environment and Forestry issued the Minister Regulations No. P.32/Menlhk/Setjen/Kum.1/3/2016

concerning the Management of Forest and Land Fire, and Minister Regulation No.

P.84/Menlhk/Setjen/Kum.1/11/2016 concerning Climate Village Program that urge villages to care and be

responsible for climate change mitigation and adaptation actions.

Action plans to address natural resource rights, land tenure, and governance are available in REDD+

National and Provincial Strategy document, in order to achieve progress in the short, medium and long-

term. The action plans also outline further steps and identifies required resources. The provinces with

relevantly vast forests and peatland areas have been facilitated to develop their Provincial Strategy for

REDD+. National Strategy for REDD+ is available at the national level. Due to the current situation in



Indonesia, the government will do the necessary adjustments with REDD+ National Strategy to

incorporate the progress that was reached by Indonesia and planned in the NDC. However, there are

challenges needed to be resolved. Tenure rights is enabling condition to support implementation of land

use regulation, such One Map Policy, etc. One map policy is one of the instruments to make a clear and

clean of forest and land property rights for REDD+ implementation by providing single legal recognition

on forest and land rights. Consequently, tenure rights have become a very critical issue in the

implementation of REDD+. Data management system is another enabling condition for spatial and

statistical information, related to emission reduction program at national and sub-national level. Robust

data management system is a crucial matter, due to its function to provide a basic element for REDD+

investment analysis. The government of Indonesia plans to address these issues and get the best condition

for REDD+ readiness.

2.2.2 REDD+ Strategy Options

The strategic framework for REDD+ has been developed to facilitate the achievement of the following

long-term goals: (i) a reduction of greenhouse gas emissions originating from Land Use, Land-Use Change,

and Forestry (LULUCF); (ii) an increased in carbon stocks; (iii) improvement of the preservation of

biodiversity; and (iv) an increased in the value and sustainability of the forest’s economic functions. The

REDD+ program framework consists of five strategic pillars as illustrated in Figure 2.5, as follows:

1) Development of an Institutional System for REDD+

2) Policies and Regulations Reviewed and Strengthened

3) Strategic Programs

4) Changes to Work Paradigms and Culture

5) Stakeholder Participation.

These interrelated pillars have been designed to facilitate the achievement of the REDD+ strategic goals

based on the above Assessment of Land Use, Land-Use Change Drivers, Forest Law, Policy and

Governance.


Figure 2. 5 The REDD+ Strategy Framework (Source: REDD+ Task Force Indonesia 2012).

The Assessment concluded that sub-component 2b of the REDD+ Strategy Options has significant progress

(green). As shown in Table 2.9, two of three criteria are ‘progressing with further development needed’

(yellow), because the expected emission reduction potentials of interventions were not directly

estimated, the REDD+ Strategy requires full support from local politics, and there are minor

inconsistencies between options and policies/programs. The ‘significant progress’ might be an

overestimate calculation, due to reassignment of progress indicator based on the results of calculating

the average of the scores. However, the ‘green’ progress is relevant, because the evidences showed that

Indonesia actually has fulfilled all the diagnostic questions, with limited shortcomings. REDD+ Strategy

Options were selected via transparent and participatory processes. It is important to have a full support

from the local politics to do feasibility assessment for REDD+ Strategy Options. The result of identification

showed minor inconsistencies between the priority REDD+ Strategy Options, policies and programs. The

agreed timeline and process to resolve the inconsistencies is in place, but not operational. This process

also requires support from broader community.

Table 2. 9 Results of Sub-component 2b. REDD+ Strategy Options

Sub-component 2b. REDD+ Strategy Options.


16. Selection and

prioritization of

REDD+ strategy

options.

a. Were REDD+ strategy

options–prioritized based on

comprehensive assessment of

direct and indirect drivers of

deforestation, barriers to

REDD+ strategy options were selected via a transparent

and participatory processes, such as public consultations,

workshops, seminars, Focus Group Discussions, and any

other techniques at national level involving national and

sub-national entities throughout the country. REDD+




forest enhancement activities

and/or informed by other

factors–selected via a

transparent and participatory

process?

strategy options are also open to be reviewed in order to

adjust with the current situations.

Note:


2012. Available at

http://bpredd.reddplusid.org/program/strategi-nasional-

redd.

http://ditjenppi.menlhk.go.id/index.php/peraturan-

perundangan

b. Was it possible to estimate

the expected emissions

reduction potentials of

interventions, and how did

they inform the design of

the REDD+ Strategy?

The expected emissions reduction potentials of

interventions were not directly estimated because it was

difficult to assess. The designs of the REDD+ strategy

were publicized via public consultations and various

media outlets in limited manner.

17. Feasibility

assessment.

Were REDD+ strategy options

assessed and prioritized for their

social, environmental and

political feasibility, risks and

opportunities, and analysis of

costs and benefit?

The REDD+ strategy options have been assessed and

prioritized for social, economic, environmental, and

political feasibility. However, the REDD+ strategy options

still requires the full support from the local politics.

18. Implications of

strategy options

on existing

sectoral policies.

a. Have major inconsistencies

between the priority REDD+

strategy options and policies

or programs in other sectors

related to the forest sector

(e.g. transport, agriculture)

been identified?

Yes, there were minor inconsistencies between the

priority REDD+ strategy options and policies or programs

in other sectors related to the forest sector (e.g.

transportation, mining, agriculture and plantation

expansion) have been identified.

b. Is an agreed timeline and

process in place to resolve

inconsistencies, and integrate

REDD+ strategy options with

relevant development

policies?

Yes, there are coordination and integration programs

between forestry sectors with other related sectors upon

agreed timeline and process, to resolve inconsistencies

and integrate REDD+ strategy options with relevant

development policies. The integration programs needed

to be strengthened by high political agenda in order to

support the operational level.

c. Are they supportive of

broader development

objectives and supported

by broad community?

Yes, they are. The REDD+ Strategy has been fairly

supportive of broader development objectives, but need

more support from broader community.

Note:


2012. Available at

http://bpredd.reddplusid.org/program/strategi-nasional-

redd.



http://ditjenppi.menlhk.go.id/index.php/peraturan-perundangan





2.2.3 Implementation Framework

The implementation framework includes adoption and implementation of legislation/regulation,

guidance for implementation, and national registry. Some legislations and/or regulations related to

REDD+ programs and activities have been enacted, adopted and implemented in Indonesia. Among

others are the moratorium of new license in primary forest and peatland for improving forest

governance (http://kerincitime.co.id/efektivitas-moratorium-pembalakan-hutan-dan-lahan-gambut-

perspektif-provinsi-jambi.html), regulated by Presidential Instruction No. 10/2011 on Moratorium of the

New Licenses and Improving Forest Governance of Primary Forest and Peatland, forest fire management

(http://www.menlhk.go.id/berita-211-pengendalian-kebakaran-hutan-dan-lahan-oleh-tim-terpadu-

karhutla-kementerian-lingkungan-hidup-dan-ke.html), peatland rehabilitation program (focused on the

large peatland area only, such as Riau, South Sumatera, Jambi, West Kalimantan, South Kalimantan,

Central Kalimantan, and Papua, see at http://brg.go.id/files/RENSTRA%20BRG%202016-

2020%20(November%202016).pdf; or

http://sains.kompas.com/read/2013/10/31/1204460/Restorasi.Ekosistem.Potensi.REDD), and One Map

Policy as stated at the Act No. 4/2011 on Geospatial Information (particular case study available in

https://www.opengovpartnership.org/sites/default/files/case-study_Indonesia_One-Map-Policy.pdf). In

short, the peatland restoration will support carbon enhancement, forest fire management will reduce an

emission and avoid deforestation and forest degradation, while one map policy is a an enabling

condition for sustainable forest management. However, there is a lack of adoption and implementation

of laws and regulations by private sectors, in relation to low carbon development due to incentive policy

that is not available yet.

As an important institution, Forest Management Unit (FMU) is expected to help improving forests

management at site level, and will become the base for the implementation of REDD+ framework. FMU

is responsible for developing, implementing, and/or overseeing site level forest governance and

management; including preparing participatory plans, enforcing forest regulations such as forest fire

control and other illegal practices, and negotiating with local communities on issues, such as land use

rights and forest access. FMUs are decentralized in structure for forest management, adapted to local

conditions, and supporting the National REDD+ Strategy. By the end of 2014, 120 FMUs were developed

under the authority of Ministry of Forestry and Sub-national governments, to increase the accountability

to local stakeholders. 600 FMUs are expected to operate in 2019. For operationals, some challenges

remain to be addressed are: (i) develop long-term forest management plan as a guidance for sustainable

management of forest, (ii) skilled human resources, (iii) operational budget for forest management, (iv)

self sufficient, and (v) develop “Knowledge Base” and FMU networking2. This ambitious target requires

commitment and supports. To administrate and manage the FMUs, several institutions needed to be

created and/or strengthened, technical and practical capacity needed to be improved and on-the-ground

operational experience with multi-stakeholder sustainable forest management needed to be built. FMU

development is supported by a number of donor programs, including GIZ and the Forest Investment

Program (FIP).

2 Further detail information on FMU is available in http://www.kph.dephut.go.id

http://www.menlhk.go.id/berita-211-pengendalian-kebakaran-hutan-dan-lahan-oleh-tim-terpadu-karhutla-kementerian-lingkungan-hidup-dan-ke.html

http://www.menlhk.go.id/berita-211-pengendalian-kebakaran-hutan-dan-lahan-oleh-tim-terpadu-karhutla-kementerian-lingkungan-hidup-dan-ke.html

http://brg.go.id/files/RENSTRA%20BRG%202016-2020%20(November%202016).pdf

http://brg.go.id/files/RENSTRA%20BRG%202016-2020%20(November%202016).pdf

http://sains.kompas.com/read/2013/10/31/1204460/Restorasi.Ekosistem.Potensi.REDD

https://www.opengovpartnership.org/sites/default/files/case-study_Indonesia_One-Map-Policy.pdf


For REDD+ implementation guidance, the infrastructure mechanism for implementation framework is

being developed and almost ready, e.g. defining carbon rights, benefit sharing mechanisms, REDD+

financing modalities, procedures for official approvals for pilots or REDD+ projects, and grievance

mechanisms. There are several regulations have been issued by the government in the past, for example

the Minister of Forestry Regulation No. P.30/Menhut-II/2009 which regulates the Procedure for REDD

Demonstration Activities, and Minister of Forestry Regulation No. P.36/Menhut- II/2009 on the Procedure

of Carbon Sink and Removal Bussiness Permits in the Protection and Production Forest Areas.

Unfortunately, institution, authority, and procedure in issuing carbon sink and removal business permit

at protection forest needed to be strengthened and improved. Permits regarding forestry business are

issued by the Directorate General of Production Forest, whereas carbon sink and removal business

conducted in protected forest area is under the jurisdiction of Directorate General of Protection Forest

and Natural Conservation. The implication suggested that carbon business is not ready to be implemented

within Protection and Conservation Forest area. Coordination between the two DGs are needed for

smooth implementation of REDD+ under the carbon sink and removal business.

The latest relevant instrument for REDD+ implementation framework–particularly related to MRV–is

National Registry System, where registry system for REDD+ is included and launched by the MoEF in

November 2016. This will be followed by the operation system. Therefore, it will take time to disseminate

the information before the system is adopted and implemented. Capacity building is being conducted to

operate the registry for Sub-national levels, as well as developing, testing, and adopting the registry

activities, especially in East Kalimantan as a targeted province to implement FCPF Carbon Fund.

Table 2.10 Results of Sub-component 2c. Implementation Framework

Sub-component 2c. Implementation Framework.


19. Adoption and

implementation of

legislation/

regulations.

a. Have legislation and/or

regulations related to REDD+

programs and activities been

adopted?

Some of legislation and/or regulations related to REDD+

programs and activities have been adopted and

implemented, for example: moratorium of new license in

primary forest and peatland for improving forest

governance, and One Map Policy. Others legislation

and/or regulations are in on-going process, including RIL-C

(Reduce Impact Logging-Carbon).

Notes:

- Presidential Instruction No. 10/2011 concerning

Moratorium of the New Licenses and Improving

Forest Governance of Primary Forest and Peatland.

- Act No. 4/2011 concerning Geospatial Information.


these relevant REDD+ laws

and policies are being

implemented?

Moratorium of new license in primary forest and peatland

for improving forest governance & One Map Policy,

licenses on ecosystem restoration, and licenses on carbon

stocking and sequestration.

Note:




- Presidential Instruction No. 10/2011 concerning

Moratorium of the New Licenses and Improving Forest

Governance of Primary Forest and Peatland.


20. Guidelines for

implementation.

What evidence is there that the

implementation framework

defines carbon rights, benefit

sharing mechanisms, REDD+

financing modalities, procedures

for official approvals (e.g. for

pilots or REDD+ projects), and

grievance mechanisms?

The infrastructure mechanism for implementation

framework is being developed. Funding instrument

(Government Regulation on General Service Agency),

benefit sharing mechanisms, procedures for official

approvals (e.g. for pilots or REDD+ projects), and grievance

mechanisms (Government Internal Control System or

Sistem Pengendalian Internal Pemerintah/SPIP) are

included in the framework.

Note:

- The Minister of Forestry Regulation (Peraturan

Menteri Kehutanan) No. P.30/Menhut-II/2009

regarding the Procedure for REDD (Tata Cara

Pengurangan Emisi dari Deforestasi dan Degradasi

Hutan (REDD)).

- The Minister of Forestry Regulation No. P.36/Menhut-

II/2009 regarding the Procedure for Carbon Sink and

Removal Business Permits in the Protection and

Production Forests.

21. National REDD+

registry and

system monitoring

REDD+ activities.

Is a national geo-referenced

REDD+ information system or

registry operational

comprehensive of all relevant

information–such as information

regarding the location,

ownership, carbon accounting

and financial flows for Sub-

national and national REDD+

programs and projects–and

ensure public access to REDD+

information?

The REDD+ information system or registry has been

developed and launched, followed by the operational of

registry system.

Note:

http://ditjenppi.menlhk.go.id/berita-ppi/2774, and

http://ditjenppi.menlhk.go.id/srn/

http://ditjenppi.menlhk.go.id/index.php/peraturan-

perundangan

http://ditjenppi.menlhk.go.id/reddplus/images/resources/

srn/manual_publik_srn.pdf.

http://ditjenppi.menlhk.go.id/reddplus/images/resources/

srn/manual_proponen_srn.pdf

Therefore, it is understandable that implementation framework progress is in the ‘orange’ state or

‘further development needed’ (Table 2.9). The guidelines for implementation and registry system are still

in the being constructed, or only constructing the guideline that requires time for implementation trial.

On the other hand, some of adoption and implementation of legislation/regulation have been progressing

quite well, but need more supports.

http://ditjenppi.menlhk.go.id/berita-ppi/2774

http://ditjenppi.menlhk.go.id/srn/



http://ditjenppi.menlhk.go.id/reddplus/images/resources/srn/manual_publik_srn.pdf

http://ditjenppi.menlhk.go.id/reddplus/images/resources/srn/manual_publik_srn.pdf

http://ditjenppi.menlhk.go.id/reddplus/images/resources/srn/manual_proponen_srn.pdf

http://ditjenppi.menlhk.go.id/reddplus/images/resources/srn/manual_proponen_srn.pdf


2.2.4 Social and Environmental Impacts

To respond the mandate from the Conference of the Parties (COP) decisions on REDD+ safeguards,

Indonesia started the development process of Safeguard Information System for REDD+ (SIS-REDD+) in

early 2011, by translating the seven REDD+ safeguards from COP-16 Decision into the national context.

During the translation process, it became clear that Indonesia’s sustainable forest management is familiar

with REDD+ safeguards.

A web-based SIS-REDD+ or “a SIS-REDD+ web platform” (http://sisredd.dephut.go.id/) was developed,

and it marked the start of the early version of SIS-REDD+ Indonesia operation. The web-platform consists

of two parts: (1) SIS-REDD+ database to collect, compile and manage the data and information on REDD+

safeguards implementation; and (2) SIS-REDD+ web platform for displaying the information.

A country-led development of the system through multi-stakeholder processes, has provided a valuable

opportunity to understand the progress of REDD+ implementation in the country, and were proven to be

valuable for capacity building through “learning by doing” processes. The multi-stakeholder processes,

supported by experts and in collaboration with international partners, has proven to be an effective and

acceptable approach for broader groups of REDD+ actors in Indonesia. The SIS-REDD+ is designed in such

way to allow synergy and integration with any other parallel safeguards-related initiatives, including the

following safeguards systems: PRISAI (Prinsip, Kriteria, Indikator Safeguards Indonesia), REDD+ SES (Social

and Environmental Safeguards), and REDD+ PGA (Participatory Governance Assessment) focusing on

transparent and effective forest governance.

PRISAI, developed by REDD+ Task Force, is a jurisdiction and project-based safeguards as an early initiative

to form a national REDD+ safeguards. PRISAI was developed for two main purposes: (1) to prevent the

implementation of REDD+ from social and environmental risks that may damage the spirit of REDD+ as a

mechanism with potential to protect the environment and community; (2) to endorse changes in policies

concerning natural resources, specifically forests and peat lands, in order to execute the principles a of

good governance, principles of human rights, and the spirit of democracy.

REDD+ SES, a REDD+ safeguards initiative that was developed in a participatory and multi-stakeholder

approach, to support SIS development in 13 countries since 2009. In Indonesia, REDD+ SES pilots have

been conducted in Central Kalimantan and East Kalimantan. The content of safeguards was based on the

key forest governance issues that the provincial government has been facing. In East Kalimantan, for

example, the SES was developed based on 11 significant and urgent issues on natural resource

management. The issues were derived from stakeholder consultations in the province and districts.

Monitoring assessment for REDD+ program in both provinces have been conducted, and the result of the

assessment then published to the public.

PGA for REDD+ is another safeguards-related initiative in the country. To inform policy-making by

providing regularly updated and robust governance information accompanied by recommendations; to

serve as a basis to inform and link with Indonesia’s REDD+ safeguard information system; and to

demonstrate–over time and when properly addressed–that there is a positive correlation between good

forest governance, in structures and practices, and the efforts to reduce Indonesia’s emissions from forest

degradation or deforestation are the main purposes of PGA.

http://www.sisredd.dephut.go.id/


The three safeguards systems are currently implemented or tested with different purposes, at different

levels and jurisdictions. Further steps are needed to ensure coherence between criteria and indicators in

the three safeguards systems (PRISAI, REDD+ SES, and REDD+ PGA), and PCI in SIS-REDD+, in order to link

the three safeguards systems with SIS-REDD+.

On the other hand, FCPF promoted Strategic Environmental and Social Assessment (SESA) as a safeguard

for REDD+. SESA was developed by the World Bank as an instrument to ensure that social and

environmental issues are integrated into the preparation of the REDD+. SESA and ESMF are mandatory

requirements under FCPF. SESA is based on analytic work to identify potential risks and impacts, and

recommendations for risk and impact mitigation. The ESMF serves as an overarching framework for the

management of environmental and social risks and impacts from REDD+ activities. Both SESA and ESMF

are standalone instruments but related to each other.

SESA initiative development in Indonesia was facilitated by National Forestry Council (Dewan Kehutanan

Nasional/DKN), an independent body with institutionalized representatives of different stakeholder

groups, and mainly supported by the FCPF since 2012, through multi-stakeholders meeting and public

consultations involving multisectors and entities. Currently, the SESA document and conceptual

framework of ESMF have not established yet. It is because Indonesia had another national priority that

focused on SIS REDD+ development as a mandat from Cancun Agreement 2010. There was also found

ambiguity within the TOR of SESA and ESMF, and interpreted differently by many parties (tool, process,

or product). In addition, Indonesia now has Strategic Environmental Assessment (Kajian Lingkungan Hidup

Strategis, KLHS) as a country initiative that inline with the need of SESA and ESMF.There is also ongoing

discussion on how to make the best use of the outcomes out of SESA process in REDD+ readiness activities,

including in its relation to SIS-REDD+ operation. Due to the FCPF PC (FPCF - Participants Committee) calls

for ERPD to meet the World Bank’s environmental and social safeguard standards, the existing safeguards

initiatives in Indonesia needed to be analyzed. There is an urgent need to continue the SESA and ESMF

development, and then conducting pilot testing in East Kalimantan Province. Indonesia has many

instruments to provide social and environmental analysis in order to support the development of the

safeguards initiatives. Unfortunately it is still separated in different activities, programmes, or projects. As

reported by Soekmadi and Yudiarti (2016), in 2016, with FCPF’s support, the MoE produced a compilation

of background information for the development of SESA Final Report and initiated the preparation for

ESMF. The report stated that more than 400 activities related Assessing potential impacts from national

REDD+ programs and policies, formulate alternative and mitigation strategies, and enhance the decision-

making process around the design of the national REDD+ framework are included in the activities

In line with these progress, the results of self-assessment process concluded that Sub-component 2d of

Social and Environmental Impacts are ‘progressing well with further development needed’ (yellow) for

the SESA and ‘further development needed’ (orange) for the ESMF (Table 2.10).

Table 2.11 Results of Sub-component 2d. Social and Environmental Impacts


Sub-component 2d. Social and Environmental Impacts.


22. Analysis of social and environmental safeguard issues.

What evidence is there that

applicable SESA issues relevant

to the country’s context have

been fully identified/analyzed

via relevant studies or diagnostic

and in consultation process?

Other mechanism, such as KLHS, EIA, HCVF are available

and functioning as complementary instruments for SESA.

National Forestry Council (Dewan Kehutanan

Nasional/DKN), representing multi-stakeholders on

forestry sector, has been facilitating SESA & ESMF

development. Indonesia also has REDD+ safeguard

related-initiatives, such as SIS-REDD, PRISAI, REDD-SES,

etc. The next challenge is how to integrate the initiatives

within the country, related to social and environmental

safeguards, to be a SESA and ESMF document.

Note:

Indonesia has established the Safeguards Information

System (SIS). Available at: http://sisredd.menlhk.go.id/.

23. REDD+ strategy design with respect to impact.

How did SESA result and

identification of social and

environment impacts–both

positive and negative–used for

prioritizing and designing REDD+

strategy options?

Indonesia used the existing mechanisms, such as KLHS,

EIA, HCVF, etc., to make sure REDD+ strategy options are

considering social and environmental impacts. The result

was used to develop REDD+ National Strategy. Hence, the

REDD+ National Strategy has accommodated the lessons

learned from REDD+ safeguards related-initiatives.

Many abstracts related to safeguards have been compiled

by Soekmadi and Yudiarti (2016)

Note:

Soekmadi, R., and Yudiarti, Y. 2016. Compile Background

Information for the Development of a Strategic

Environment and Social Assessment (SESA) Final Report

for Indonesia’s REDD+ Readiness Preparation. Research

and Development Center for Social Economy Policy and

Climate Change in collaboration with the Forest Carbon

Partnership Facility (FCPF). Bogor, Indonesia.

[http://puspijak.org/upload_files/Safeguard-Laporan-Yun-

Bibliografi_Safeguard_REDD_layout_20161123R.docx]

24. Environmental and

social

management

framework.

What evidence is there that the

ESMF is in place and managing

environmental and social risk or

potential impacts related to

REDD+ activities?

Indonesia has social and environmental impact

assessment and guidance. Indonesia has also established

the Safeguards Information System for REDD+. Yet, a

conceptual framework of ESMF needed to be developed.

Note:

Note: There are various references and regulations,

among other:

- The Safeguards Information System for REDD+ (SIS-

REDD+) available at: http://sisredd.menlhk.go.id/.

- Principles, Criteria, and Indicators for REDD+ Safeguards Indonesia (PRISAI)

- Participatory Governance Assessment: Indonesia Forest, Land and REDD+ Governance Index

http://sisredd.menlhk.go.id/





- AMDAL (Analisis Mengenai Dampak Lingkungan, Environmental Impact Assessment)

- KLHS (Strategic Environmental Assessment) - PHPL (Pengelolaan Hutan Produksi Lestari,

Sustainable Production Forest Management) - SVLK (Sistem Verifikasi Legalitas Kayu, System for

Verification on Timber Legality) - SFM (Sustainable Forest Management) Sertification

by the SFC and LEI (Lembaga Ecolabel Indonesia, Indonesia Ecolable Agency)

2.2.5 Funding Instruments and Benefit Sharing Mechanism

2.2.5.1 Funding Instruments

One of the strategic roles for funding REDD+ preparation and implementation in Indonesia is to improve

Indonesia’s efforts in reaching targeted achievement on reducing emission. Directorate General for

Climate Change (DGCC), under the Ministry of Environment and Forestry (MoEF), has developed a

Strategic Plan on how climate change mitigation and adaptation can be funded. Climate change financing

framework can be funded by two main sources (DJPPI, 2015):

a. National Budget System (Anggaran Pendapatan dan Belanja Negara/APBN).

MoEF 2015-2019 allocated budget for climate change related programs of IDR 905.99 billion

(approximately US$ 67.6 million, when exchange rate used is IDR 13,400 for US$ 1). However, the total

budget needed for climate change related activities during 2015-2019 is IDR 2.223 trillion (approximately

US$ 165.9 billion). Hence, it still needs additional budget IDR 1.317 trillion (approximately US$ 98.3 billion)

from other sources. Currently, there are grants from Indonesia’s development partners, such as

Government of Indonesia-Norway partnership, AusAID, GIZ, FIP, TNC, FCPF, UNREDD, ITTO, EU, JICA,

KOICA, Japan, WWF, and others, with total amount US$ 1.2 billion. Mobilization of funding from various

sources of fund is a crucial stage, in order to achieve the target of climate change programs, to enhance

the targeted locations, and to improve the programs quality.

b. Partners

Funding from partners will be allocated to fill the gaps of IDR 1.317 trillion. The potential of partners’

collaboration are:

• National : Cooperation with the local and national partners, national and multinational

companies, on climate change-related activities.

• Bilateral : Norway, European Union, Denmark, United Kingdom, Australia, South Korea,

Mexico, USA, the Netherlands, Germany, Swiss, Sweden, Japan.


• Multilateral : UNFCCC, UNEP, UNDP, Multilateral Development Bank, FAO, GEF, GCF, FCPF, and

other Multilateral Funds.

There are a significant amount of REDD+-related donor funding schemes available for readiness activities

and REDD+ implementation. However, DGCC of the MoEF has noted that budget allocated for REDD+ of

US$ 1.2 billion (readiness, transition phase, as well as those who are committed for results based

payment) through bilateral and multilateral schemes (such as Government of Indonesia-Norway

partnership, AusAID, GIZ, FIP, TNC, FCPF, UNREDD, ITTO, EU, JICA, KOICA, Japan, WWF, and others). It is

only around 1.2% from the gap of budget needed. Hence, the Government of Indonesia still has to fill the

remaining budget gap progressively.

Since 2011, FCPF has been contributing to fill the gaps at national and sub-national levels for REDD+

readiness activities. The contribution was grouped at four main components of analytic work,

management of readiness process, REL and MRV, and regional data collection and capacity building. Table

2.12 shows the roles of FCPF on REDD+ readiness process in Indonesia.

Table 2. 12 The role of FCPF on REDD+ readiness in Indonesia

Component Actual activity 20011-2016 Planned activity 2017-2019

1 analytic Work - Identifying national activities which resulted in reducing emision

- Stakeholders’ coordination on comprehensive mitigation actions for REDD+.

- Application of methodical approach conducted in East Kalimantan to national approach

- Unified National Carbon Accounting System, operational and sustained PSP management

- Integration of sub-national data into national data management system

- Data management (reporting, data entry, QA/QC, data documentation),

- Development of national benefit sharing mechanism

- Positioning of REDD+ in current commitments of Indonesia's NDC

- The role of private sector in low carbon development process.

2 Management of readiness process

- A process for stakeholders to review existing regulatory frameworks and formulate an integrated REDD Regulation

- Develop a guidance for effective engagement with indigenous people

- Capacity building on carbon accounting and monitoring

- Dissemination of FCPF REDD+ readiness preparations

- Workshops/consultations on various topics - Establishment of a sub-national REDD

Working Group - Establishing an institutional setting and

legal framework to work on the causes of deforestation, land use and demands,

Focusing on REDD+ provincial program in East Kalimantan:

- Development of a provincial investment and implementation plan

- Building capacities in district governments to develop and implement low carbon development plans

- Application of Land and Resource Tenure Assessment

- Implementing SIS-REDD+ to mitigate negative potential of social environmental impacts and applying National ESMF to activities anticipated for first year of project implementation

- Finalization of SESA report


Component Actual activity 20011-2016 Planned activity 2017-2019

demographic development, activities resulting emissions reduction, and the increase of relocations

- PSP maintenance, MRV, and DA. - Establishment of Safeguard Information

System - Improvement in management of data,

lessons, and funding partner coordination - Development of SESA Encourage and

strengthening the implementation of safeguards national policies and framework

- Developing and adopting a Grievance Redress Mechanism

- Developing an agreed benefit sharing plan - Identifying opportunities to implement and

eventually scale-up REDD+ and landscape interventions at the sub-national level.

3 REL and MRV - Development of a timeline analysis of primary social economic and policy aspects of land use change

- Listing of the new PSPs and re-listing of the existing PSPs

- Development of suistanable monitoring forest carbon application system

- Forest Carbon Monitoring Database to Support National Forest carbon Monitoring System

Focuses on implementation of REL-MRV approach and data management system in East Kalimantan:

- Development and adoption of REL - Designing and establishing a sub-national MRV

system - Establishing PSP to enhance quality observations - Developing data management system for critical

spatial and statistical data to track and manage information of Emission Reduction program

- Assessment of leakage and reversals, and develop its mitigation programme

4 Regional data collection and capacity building

- Developing and improving REDD+ framework at selected areas (mainstreaming/combining climate change adaptation and mitigation)

- Developing socio-economic and biophysical baseline data

- Finalizing the ER-PIN and preparing the ERPD

- Public consultation on establishment of sub national REDD+ Working Group Readiness Package development.

Enhancing the capacity for program management and strategic policy analysis which will be focused on Project Management Unit, Training & Learning, and Contingency.

Expenditure/ Budget

US$ 3.6 million US$ 5 million The agreement available on: (https://www.forestcarbonpartnership.org/sites/fcp/files/2016/Oct/FCPF%20Indonesia%20-%20Amendement%20November%202016.pdf).

Indonesia needs to prepare a main instrument of a regulation on how to arrange sources of REDD+ funding

development, REDD+ funding mechanism, and REDD+ funding institution. The hierarchy of regulations is

as follow (Widjaksono, 2016):

https://www.forestcarbonpartnership.org/sites/fcp/files/2016/Oct/FCPF%20Indonesia%20-%20Amendement%20November%202016.pdf




• Government Regulation (Peraturan Pemerintah/PP) on Environment Economics Instrument

(Instrumen Ekonomi Lingkungan Hidup/IELH); which serves as an umbrella (basic law) on

environment based fund.

• President Regulation on environmental funding; serves as the basic law of climate change fund

(protection of atmosphere function), which regulates environmental financing management,

including climate change fund (among others, REDD+).

• Ministry Regulation on Climate Change Fund; the technical regulation on how to regulate technical

criteria of climate change fund utilization (mitigation – REDD+, adaptation, ozone protection).

• Mobilization Strategies on climate change fund; conceptual strategic and technical directions on

moving within the areas and sectoral based climate change fund

Indonesia is still implementing a process on drafting the Government Regulation on Environment Economics Instrument (Rancangan PP-IELH). The formal basic/foundation for this RPP-IELH is Law No. 23/2009 about Protection and Environment Management (Widjaksono, 2016). Until now it is still under discussion with various parties (MoEF, Bappenas, and Ministry of Finance), neverthelles the final result and its resolution are beyond the control of MoEF.

Several Demonstration Activities and REDD+-related pilot projects existed and have contributed lessons learned for Indonesian REDD+ readiness preparations. In order to scale up these project/site level activities, further preparations will be done and subject for financing/subject to fund. National (domestic) funding mechanisms still need more explorations to complement the roles of government and its partners; where the role of private sector is facing new challenges.

An initiative set on the usage of CSR fund for REDD+ scheme (and other environmental service schemes), and CER (Corporate Environmental Responsibility). The implementation later found that there is lack of REDD+ regulations considered easy to understand by private sectors, as the initiative also came to rejection by local communities due to tenure rights issues (double claims, unclear property rights, and lack of rights enforcement measures). Another initiative of private sector involvement in carbon sink and sequestration business also got stuck in this phase; as experienced by (PT Global Alam Lestari, the first company with Carbon Sink and Removal Business License in production forest area in South Sumatra). Other initiatives developed on protection forest area faced another obstacle on the carbon sink and removal business licensing. Based the findings, MoEF seems still not ready yet to implement the MoEF Regulation No. P.36/Menhut-II/2009 (about licensing procedures on carbon sink and business isolation).

Therefore, it is necessary to formulate measures to ensure legal framework, businesses, and an area for private sectors involvement in the REDD+ implementation. In addition, the green investment approaches and policies by Bank Indonesia will greatly help to offer incentives for private companies which work accordingly with the principles of sustainability and the environment.

2.2.5.2 REDD+ Benefit Sharing Mechanism

The Government of Indonesia (GoI) has used many of its experiences in approaches toward benefit sharing design. At national level, Indonesia has promoted MP3EI as an approach in national development. The payment used in this program among other National Budget System (APBN) and international fund, while the incentives will be distributed through input-based/compliance, and performance based schemes.

Indonesia has identified the beneficiaries of REDD+ scheme, roles or contributions, and benefits that they can get. The benefit sharing rules developed for REDD+ in Indonesia have been contentious and are still


under ongoing discussion. The main challenge faced is the fact that MoEF does not have the legal authority to set up such regulations, which are under the purview of the Ministry of Finance. As an alternative or complementary system in the context, Indonesia has provided several channels as options of vertical REDD+ benefits sharing mechanism (in that REDD+ benefits are shared among entities vertically, national to sub national)such as Fiscal Transfer, Trust Fund, National Program of Community Empowerment (Program Nasional Pemberdayaan Masyarakat/PNPM), and General Services Agency (Badan Layanan Umum/BLU).

As the latest initiative, the BLU of Environmental Financing is an agency under the Ministry of Finance (MoFin), but operates under the co-operation between MoFin and MoEF. Indonesia is now at the stage of drafting the Presidential Regulation on Environmental Fund, which arranges two main issues of environment fund management and environment fund institution (as BLU is part of this institution). The BLU mechanism is shown in Figure 2.6.

Figure 2. 6 A meta concept of BLU mechanism


(Source: DJPPI (2016), presentation on August 3rd, 2016)

Another discourse is about horizontal REDD+ benefit sharing mechanism, in that REDD+ benefits are shared among entities horizontally involved in the programme (such as within communities, households, or between communities). With the experience on regulating a benefit sharing mechanism horizontally, Indonesia has implemented the pilots or DA-REDD+ in the site level. The implementations played an important role as learning processes and knowledge transfers, as they provided advice for national and sub-national policies, provided ideas for national instruments or standards, as well as showing benefits for result-based action readiness at the sub-national level (province/district/site) in the transition process towards REDD+ full implementation.

The DA-REDD+ provided lessons learned from the exercise of benefit sharing mechanisms (Widjaksono, 2016) such as (1) UN-REDD, conducted benefit analysis and constraints of the existing distribution system, and provided options for REDD+ payment system, (2) GIZ- FORCLIME Financial Module, developed a sustainable payment system in Malinau, Berau, and Kapuas Hulu District, (3) IAFCP – KFCP, developed a payment system in the community level, (4) Berau Forest Carbon Programme (by TNC), developed payment system at the district level, and (5) FFI, Community Based REDD+ developed in three locations at Kalimantan, Jambi and Nusa Tenggara Barat. The DA-REDD+ experiences on benefit sharing mentioned are still in their conceptual frameworks, although the FCPF Carbon Fund in East Kalimantan province poses a significant role on how benefit sharing mechanism applied in practices. FCPF Carbon Fund can choose a vertical and/or horizontal mechanism from options mentioned above. As a next step, the central government and local governments, including all parties involved in the East Kalimantan Carbon Fund scheme should decide a relevant benefit sharing mechanism through multi-stakeholder discussion and multi-discipline study, as well as cross-sectoral approach.

The progress mentioned above also described during the Assessment and concluded that Sub-component 2e of Funding Instrument and Benefit Sharing Mechanism is ‘progressing well, but further development is still required’ (Table 2.13).

Table 2. 13 Results of Sub-component 2e. Funding Instrument and Benefit Sharing Mechanism

Sub-component 2e. Funding Instrument and Benefit Sharing Mechanism.


25. Funds management capacity.

How are institutions and arrangements demonstrating effective, efficient and transparent fiscal management, including coordination with other development partner-funded activities?

The fund institution has not been established yet. The concept of funding mechanism arrangement has been developed, and now it is an on going process to be legalized by Government Regulation. Funding mechanism will be in the form of General Service Agency (Badan Layanan Umum/BLU) of Environmental Financing.

Note:

Government Regulation Bill on the Environment Economics Instrument is based on the Act No. 23/2009 concerning Protection and Environment Management.

26. Availability of fund. How is it shown that national and international REDD+ institutions are providing committed funds for REDD+ under clear mutually supportive mandates with

There are funding sources committed for REDD+ payment in Indonesia, e.g. through billateral and multilateral agreements, joint creditting mechanism, national budget, and others.

Note:




adequate, predictable and sustainable budgets?

http://www.redd-indonesia.org/index.php/publikasi/daftar-publikasi/12919-kepastian-pembiayaan-dalam-keberhasilan-implementasi-redd-di-indonesia

27. Benefit sharing mechanism.

Transparent and equitable existing mechanism.

Several existing options of benefit sharing mechanism in Indonesia are: fiscal transfer, Specific Allocation Funds (Dana Aloksi Khusus/DAK), General Allocation Funds (Dana Alokasi Umum/DAU), National Community Empowerment Program (Program Nasional Pemberdayaan Masyarakat/PNPM), etc. These mechanisms offer a transparent and fair mechanism through periodic reporting and auditing, link to the national budget system, as they are controlled by internal and external supervision body. These mechanisms are adjusted for REDD+ benefit sharing mechanism.

Notes:

- Minister of Forestry Regulation No. 30/2009 about the Procedures of Reducing Emission from Deforestation and Forest Degradation - REDD+.

- Presidential Regulation No. 80/2011 on Trust Fund.

2.3 Reference Levels/Emission Reference Levels

One of the ‘significant’ progresses of the four components in the REDD+ Readiness Self-Assessment

framework is Component 3 of Reference Emission Levels/Reference Levels (RELs/RLs) (Table 2.14 and

2.15). Reference level is one of development works that shows an advance progress and is proven by this

instrument after the UNFCCC requirement.

Table 2. 14 Results of Component 3. Reference Emissions Levels/Reference Levels


3. Reference Emissions Levels/ Reference Levels

–

Decision 12/CP.17 provides guidance for developing country party aiming to commit on REDD+ to include

in its FREL/FRL submission transparent, complete, consistent with guidance agreed by the COP, and with

accurate information for allowing a technical assessment of the data, methodologies and procedures used

constructig the FREL/FRL. Decision 12/CP.17 also allows series of approach under the control of forest

reference emission level and/or forest reference level (FREL/FRL), which enables Parties to improve the






FREL/FRL by incorporating better data, improve methodologies and; where punctual and additional pools

mark the adequate and predictable support as referenced by decision 1/CP.16, paragraph 71.

Indonesia accepted the invitation as in Dec. 12/CP.17 by voluntarily submitting proposed national FREL

for deforestation and forest degradation in the context of results-based payments for activities related to

REDD+ under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in the COP 21 Paris.

The submitted FREL declared as consistent with COP-guidance for FREL/FRL construction (Dec. 12/CP.17)

and technical assessment (Dec. 13/CP.19), as well as taking into account relevant COP decisions -

especially on modalities for MRV (Decision 14/CP.19) which include national policies and plans.

The submitted FREL covered an area of 113.2 million ha of natural forests in 1990, which accounted for

about 78.6 % of the total designated forest areas. It could be explained that Indonesia focuses on

protecting only the remaining tropical rainforest. The forest areas equal to 60% of the total country land

area. Two REDD+ activities under decision 1/CP.16 paragraph 70 included in FREL construction were

deforestation and forest degradation. The submission also included CO2 emissions from tree above

ground biomass and degraded peat land.

The FREL completed by a national team that formed under the Minister of Environment and Forestry

Decree No. 134/2015. The team consists of two groups focusing on policy and technical aspects. The policy

team addressed key issues significant for FREL development, including policy consideration and

substantial national circumstances. The technical team focused on translating policy implication into

quantitative calculation and qualitative explanation, including setting and approving assumptions and

important adjustment, as well as establishing the document. In addition, the role of technical team was

to assure scientific background on this submission. The FREL document has provided the way to improve

the FREL in the future, namely: improving NFMS using appropriate technology, improving emission factors

by employing a database system, and improving peatland map.

Table 2. 15 Results of Criteria in Component 3. Reference Emissions Levels/Reference Levels

Component 3. Reference Emission Levels/Reference Levels.


28. Demonstration of methodology.

a. Does the preliminary sub-national or national forest REL or RL presented (as part of the R-Package) properly use a clearly documented methodology, based on a step-wise approach?

Significant progress. FREL has been under technical assessment by UNFCCC and almost completed with no significant correction, land use data and peat land need to be synchronize.

Note:

MoEF. 2015. National Forest Reference Emission Level for Deforestation and Forest Degradation: In the Context of Decision 1/CP.16 para 70 UNFCCC (Encourages developing country Parties to contribute to mitigation actions in the forest sector), published by DGCC of MoEF Indonesia. Available at http://redd.unfccc.int/files/national_frel_for_redd__in_indonesia_2015.pdf

http://redd.unfccc.int/files/national_frel_for_redd__in_indonesia_2015.pdf





b. Are plans for additional steps and data needs provided? Is the relationship between the sub-national and the evolving national reference level properly demonstrated?

Additional steps and data provided, but the relationship between the sub-national and national RL is in the process of development.

29. Use of historical data, and adjusted for national circumstances.

a. How does the REL/RL establishment take into account historical data? If adjustments made for national circumstance, what is the rationale and supportive data demonstrating that the proposed adjustments are credible and defendable?

The FREL is credible and defendable, as measured through TA FREL by UNFCCC).

Note:

MoEF. 2015. National Forest Reference Emission Level for Deforestation and Forest Degradation: In the Context of Decision 1/CP.16 para 70 UNFCCC (Encourages developing country Parties to contribute to mitigation actions in the forest sector), published by DGCC of MoEF Indonesia.

Available at http://redd.unfccc.int/files/national_frel_for_redd__in_indonesia_2015.pdf

b. Is sufficient data and documentation provided in a transparent manner to allow reconstruction or independent cross-examination of the REL/RL?

The data and documentation of deforestation and forest degradation has been completed, but data and information of forest and peat fire need to be verified.

Note:

Indonesia’s forest monitoring system is known as SIMONTANA (Sistem Monitoring Hutan Nasional). Available online at http://geoportal.menlhk.go.id/arcgis/home/, and http://webgis.dephut.go.id/ for display and viewing, and.

30. Technical feasibility of the methodological approach, and consistency with UNFCCC/IPCC guidance and guidelines.

Is the REL/RL (presented as part of the R-Package) based on transparent, complete and accurate information, consistent with UNFCCC guidance and the most recent IPCC guidance and guidelines, and allowing for technical assessment of the data sets, approaches, methods, models (if applicable) and assumptions used in the construction of the REL/RL?

Yes. FREL development used IPCC 2006 Guidelines and IPCC 2013 Wetlands Supplement, as FREL Indonesia was already undergone TA FREL by UNFCCC.

Note:

MoEF. 2015. National Forest Reference Emission Level for Deforestation and Forest Degradation: In the Context of Decision 1/CP.16 para 70 UNFCCC (Encourages developing country Parties to contribute to mitigation actions in the forest sector), published by DGCC of MoEF Indonesia. Available at


In accordance with the Assessment at national level, activities on this Component in East Kalimantan and

South Sumatra Provinces also reached ‘significant’ progress for both provinces (Annex 2 and 3). Yet, there

is a need to work on the RELs/RLs between the national and sub-national levels, to show more of the



http://geoportal.menlhk.go.id/arcgis/home/

http://webgis.dephut.go.id/



relationship between the two levels; as synchronization and aggregation mechanism set to develop

further.

2.4 Forest Monitoring System and Safeguard

Component 4 of Monitoring Systems for Forests and Safeguards is the last component in the Assessment

that reached ‘significant’ progress, although it was resulted from ‘yellow’ and ‘green’ progresses in its sub-

components (Table 2.16). East Kalimantan and South Sumatra Provinces are also reaching ‘significant’

progress for this Component (Annex 2 and 3). The following sub-sections will describe how these

progresses could be achieved.

Table 2. 16 Results of Component 4. Monitoring Systems for Forests, and Safeguards


4. Monitoring Systems for Forest, and Safeguard

a. National/Sub-national Forest Monitoring System

b. Information System for Multiple Benefits, Other Impacts, Governance, and Safeguards

2.4.1 National Forest Monitoring System

The existing Indonesia’s forest monitoring system is known as SIMONTANA (Sistem Monitoring Hutan

Nasional). It is available online at http://geoportal.menlhk.go.id/arcgis/home/, coupled with the WebGIS

at http://webgis.dephut.go.id/ for display and viewing (Figure 2.7). SIMONTANA was launched in 16 June

2015.

Figure 2. 7 Preview of Sistem Monitoring Hutan Nasional (SIMONTANA), the Indonesia’s NFMS.




Indonesia established a monitoring system on forest resources in 1986, when the Government began its

National Forest Inventory (NFI) program; FAO gave the Ministry of Forestry technical support for the four

years to 1990. The NFI is now funded by the national budget. The NFI was originally designed to gather

information on standing stock volumes for each type of forest, namely mangroves, peatlands, lowland

forests and mountain forests. The gathered information about forests distribution, forest cover types and

land use is essential for decision makers, forest planners and forest managers. The information is also very

important for controlling forestry sector activities at both national and sub-national levels.

The NFI has laid the foundation to establsih a system to monitor forest resources, with four major

components of forest resources (status) assessment, forest resources (change) monitoring, geographic

information system (GIS) and users’ involvement.

Several divisions carry out the NFI operational. The FRA (Forest Resources Assessment) division co-

ordinates field inventories and ground-based measurement activities; it also operates the Field Data

System (FDS) and is responsible for its integration with the GIS. The DIAS (Digital Image Analysis System)

division interprets and monitors changes in forest cover using multi-date satellite (imagery) data; it also

prepares outputs that will serve as inputs for the FRM division. The FRM (Forest Resources [Change]

Monitoring) division, which has GIS capability, is responsible for national mapping and keeping maps up

to date for the GIS database analysis; it is also responsible for modeling forest land use, including

calculating forest coverage width and its distribution. The SDN (Spatial Data Networking) division is

responsible for providing standardized spatial data for the Ministry of Forestry to enable data sharing and

data exchange that will be beneficial for broad audiences. This task includes providing benefits to the

wider community, involving of a range of user groups and acting/facilitating as a node for spatial data

networks at the national level. The NFI system is fully supported by all the staff at the Jakarta

headquarters, along with 17 regional offices across Indonesia.

.

There is a crucial need to continually updating and systematically archiving the data on forests and

relevant information, as well as making them available in clear timeframes for both decision makers and

the public. From the first NFI in 1986 until 1996, the Ministry of Forestry undertook periodical nationwide

forest resources monitoring and assessment. Monitoring activities designed and established through the

NFI program established as the main tasks and functions of the Directorate General of Forestry Planning

at the Ministry of Forestry. The organization has four divisions, namely Forest Inventory, Forest

Monitoring, Mapping and Spatial Data Networking (Figure 2.8).


Figure 2. 8 Main tasks and functions of the Directorate of Forest Resources Inventory and Monitoring,

Directorate General of Forestry Planning, Ministry of Forestry, Indonesia.

2.4.1.1 Land-cover map Developed by Ministry of Forestry (MoF) of Indonesia

Indonesia’s forest and land-cover map initiated by MoF from the 2000s as part of NFMS, where the

Landsat images used to produce a national coverage of forest and land cover map. During the period, the

maps could only be updated every three years based on data availability, due to clouds and haze problems.

This system has used satellite data since 1990s. In total, about 217 Landsat TM/ETM+ scenes needed to

cover the entire land area of Indonesia, excluding other scenes to minimize/remove clouds and haze

presence. Up to around 2006, other data sets such as SPOT Vegetation 1000 meters and MODIS 250

meters used for alternative, especially when the purchased Landsat data of MoF were not yet ready for

processing and classification processes.

More consistent data was available around 2009; after the change in Landsat data policy of the United

States Geological Survey (USGS) in 2008 - which has made Landsat data available free of charge over the

internet. The new Landsat data policy, automatically benefits Indonesia by increasing the number of data

available for supporting the mapping system. In 2013, MoF started to use the newly launched Landsat 8

OLI to monitor Indonesian land cover condition and placed the Landsat 7 ETM+ as a substitution for cloud

elimination. More data available through free-download has opened opportunities for Indonesia to

change the three-year interval into annual basis. Up to now, land-cover data is available for the years of

2000, 2003, 2006, 2009, 2011, 2012, and 2013. In the last five years, the updating work for land cover

data of 1900s has carried out, to renew the information made during the era of NFI. However, USGS and


Indonesian National Institute of Aeronautics and Space (Lembaga Penerbangan dan Antariksa

Nasional/LAPAN) have not enough Landsat archive available, so that annual 1990s data were not possible,

and only two 1990s sets of data established - of : 1990 and 1996. To maintain continuity and work

improvement, collaboration between LAPAN for Landsat data preparation and the MoF for classification

process becomes significant key for future works. These two institutions have a Memorandum of

Understanding for the work since 2004 and has recently updated.

Variation of sensors and methods employed post 2000 is a significant contributor in better illustrating

national land-cover, compared to before 2000 when land-cover map in the year of NFI was mostly derived

from various data formats (hard copy, soft copy, analog, digital). The historical condition and ongoing

improvements is illustrated in Figure 2.9.

Figure 2. 9 Historical condition and improvement in establishing the land-cover map of Indonesia that

consists of three significant periods.

Period 1 (before 2000) saw all available data used, including analog data and Landsat hard copy that was

delineated manually and digitized; where all products of Period 1 generated under the National Forest

Inventory (NFI) activity. Most scenes in Landsat data were either found as softcopy in CCT format or hard

copy format, as they did not have the same year interval; as during Period 1 it was the only available data

for generating land cover.


Period 2 (2000-2009) was the time where digital data started used. However, the manual classification

method applied was time consuming and caused delays in product deliveries; especially when there work

experiences limited in wall-to-wall mapping. An alternative approach using SPOT Vegetation 1000 meters

and MODIS 250 meters conducted for immediate reporting. Within Period 3 (2009 on), data availability

was no longer a constraint and only Landsat data used as the source. Within this period, overcoming time

consuming manual classification process became main concern. Significant improvements

applied during earlier period (2006) and turned into a major concern at the beginning of the Period 3

(2009); as the mentioned improvement intended to migrate every single layer of time-sequential land

cover data (2000, 2003, 2006, and 2009) into a single geodatabase; a solution to improve inter-

dependency among layers. The land cover map of Indonesia presented in 23 classes, including 6 classes

of natural forests, 1 class of plantation forest, 15 classes of non-forested, and 1 class of clouds-no data

(SNI: 7645-2010).

Manual classification is time-consuming and labor intensive; involving the MoF staffs from district and

provincial levels to manually interpret and digitize the satellite images, to capture local knowledge in the

same time. Prior to 1989, visual interpretation on aerial photos started to take place, and later within NFI,

continuously employed on Landsat data. Digital classification was initially generated in the early 1990s;

but constrained with conversion of raster format into vector format for further analysis. Visual

classification technique was then selected for operational method.

Following the latest development on data availability, the MoF has been refining the national land cover

classification map, trace-back from 1990s to 2013, and plans to update deforestation data over more than

two decades using the refined land cover data set. The MoF has been collecting and archiving more than

10,000 scenes of Landsat images from the entire country dating back from the early 1990s on. Although

targeting the observation period of the 1990s to 2013, the first version of refinement (up-to July 2014)

focused on data 2009 on. The flow of work on developing land cover data annually depicted in Figure

2.10.


Figure 2.10 The work flow of SIMONTANA in producing an annual nationwide land cover map.

Several Indonesia National Standards (SNI) for measuring and monitoring forest carbon have been

introduced by Ministry of Forestry, including:

1. SNI 7724: 2011 - Measurement and Carbon Stock Accounting-Field Measurement to measure forest

carbon stock (BSN, 2011a).

2. SNI 7725: 2011 - Development of allometric equations for estimating forest carbon stocks based on

field measurement (ground based forest carbon accounting) (BSN, 2011b).

3. SNI 7848: 2013 - Demonstration Activities for REDD+ (BSN, 2013).

In order to support the carbon information in Sub-national level, FCPF has established Permanent

Sample Plots (PSPs) for monitoring forest carbon in 14 provinces. The measurements were conducted to


obtain data in five carbon pools (above ground, below ground, litter, dead wood, and soil). To integrated

efforts conducted by central and local governments, as well as other initiatives with similar objectives

for managing database, forest carbon monitoring system in the provincial level is required to integrate

all available data. In addition, data integration in the national level is also needed. The database (Figure

2.11) is accessible at http://www.puspijak.org/karbon/.

Figure 2.11 Web-based Forest Carbon Monitoring System (available at www.puspijak.org).

http://www.puspijak.org/karbon/


2.4.1.2 Improvement needed to increase sustainability and transparency of National Forest Monitoring

System

While the basic elements needed for monitoring greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions have been established

and practiced in activities related to forest inventory, implementation of reporting and verification

requires the application of international standardized guidelines, and the involvement of external

independent bodies. Indonesia’s current forest monitoring processes can be developed into a robust and

transparent system for monitoring and reporting REDD+ activities by strengthening capacity at national

level and building capacity at Sub-national level. Further investments will be needed to build regulatory

mechanisms for checks and balances, and mechanisms for coordination between and within government

institutions. This is also an effort to support the need of sustainability and transparency of the system to

the public.

The current national forest inventory and forest monitoring systems provide a foundation for developing

a national forest monitoring system (NFMS), which was launched as SIMONTANA. The Forest Inventory

and Forest Monitoring divisions of the Directorate should be able to produce activity data and determine

emission factors. Supporting this capacity is the Mapping division’s responsibility, where it would conduct

spatial analysis using GIS and modeling. The Spatial Data Networking division will support data sharing

and data exchange, thus publishing information on forest resources and monitoring to the public.

By establishing NFI, Indonesia have the capacity to conduct REDD+ MRV on the national level, but the

system needs to be strengthened as part of the development of the NFMS. Meanwhile, international

reporting to the UNFCCC is standardized and will be carried out by the focal point in each country, and

verification process takes place as part of an external independent process. Thus, data validation is the

next issue to be considered, in order to strengthen the quality of the data. Although BPREDD+ (2015)

stated that data validation, to assure the classification results, has been carried out by comparing land

cover map to the post classification field data, this activity has only been performed one time, while the

data has been produced for at least 10 periods.

The creation of a national measurement and monitoring system is the main activity for REDD+ MRV.

Indonesia has extensive experience in this area, but other initiatives related to measurement and

monitoring currently at the field level needed to be harmonized and synergetic, then aggregated to the

national level. There is no need to build a new system, but strong leadership will be required to create

clear mechanisms and procedures, to facilitate the compilation and scaling-up of existing initiatives and

ongoing activities into robust national capacity.

The next challenge is how to integrate the web-based forest carbon database system with Indonesia

National Forest Monitoring System (NFMS), led by Directorate General of Planology, MoEF. Integration

challenge also came from two other monitoring systems, PEP and Bioclime. PEP, for instance,

mainstreaming MRV under the National Development Planning Agency, through the following

mechanism, that has been developed (FORDA 2014):

- All sectors report the GHG measurement activities periodically every 3 months, from District

government agencies to District Planning Agency (Bappeda).


- Districts Planning Agencies then report their carbon monitoring activities every 3 months to

Provincial Planning Agency, then the Provincial Planning Agency submits the report to the

secretariat of National Action Plan of GHG Emission Reduction (RAD GRK).

Another chalange is how to develop a leakage management. However, the risk of leakage can be mitigated

by other program’s, among others addressing spatial planning issues, and improved land governance. The

good example of the leakage management planning has been adopted by The ER Program for East

Kalimantan Province (available at

https://www.forestcarbonpartnership.org/sites/fcp/files/2016/May/Indonesian%20ER-

PIN%2020160429%20Final.pdf.)

Table 2.17 shows the Assessment results for Sub-component 4a of National/Sub-national Forest

Monitoring System. Although institutional arrangements and capacities (Criteria 33) are in ‘significant’

progress, the results of the Assessment for other criteria in the sub-component 4a, about the progress of

implementing the REDD+ activities, are varied. Among all diagnostic questions in the Assessment, Criteria

32b, the system to identify and assess displacement of emission or leakage, is the only system that ‘has

not demonstrate progress’. This system has not been developed, since the system has not fit to assess the

displacement of emission.

Table 2.17 Results of Sub-component 4a. National/Sub-national Forest Monitoring System

Sub-component 4a. National/Sub-national Forest Monitoring System.


31. Documentation of

monitoring

approach.

a. Is there clear rationale or

analytic evidence

supporting the selection of

the used or proposed

methodology (combination

of remote sensing and

ground-based forest

carbon inventory

approaches, systems

resolution, coverage,

accuracy, inclusions of

carbon pools and gases)

and improvement over

time?

Yes, there is. Activity data has been under development

of interpretation adjustment from manual to

automatic.

Note:

Indonesia’s NFMS is available online at

http://geoportal.menlhk.go.id/arcgis/home/, and

WebGIS at http://webgis.dephut.go.id/

b. Has the system been

technically reviewed and

nationally approved, and is

it consistent with national

and international existing

and emerging guidance?

NFMS using an upgraded existing system that has been

reviewed nationally by BIG, and consistent with

national guidance.

Note:

I Indonesia’s NFMS is available online at



https://www.forestcarbonpartnership.org/sites/fcp/files/2016/May/Indonesian%20ER-PIN%2020160429%20Final.pdf









c. Are potential sources of

uncertainties identified to

the extent possible?

Yes, further development needed, such as potential

source of uncertainty, DSS platform, simple reporting,

etc.

Note:




32. Demonstration of

early system

implementation

a. What evidence is there

that the system has the

capacity to monitor the

specific REDD+ activities

prioritized in the country’s

REDD+ strategy?

Land Cover Data is produced annually. It can detect

deforestation, but needs improvement to detect forest

regrowth and degradation.

Note:


http://nfms.dephut.go.id/ipsdh/, and WebGIS at


b. How does the system

identify and assess

displacement of emissions

(leakage), and what are the

early results?

The system is not yet fit to assess the displacement of

emission (leakage).

NFMS is focused only to monitor landcover changes.

Therefore, NFMS can not address leakage/

displacement, because the available spatial data have

low resolution.

c. How are key stakeholders

involved, participating or

consulted, in the

development and/or early

implementation of the

system, including data

collection and any

potential verification of its

results?

The system is still an internal mechanism in the MoEF,

and in the initiation process to engage multi-

stakeholder participation.

d. What evidence is there that

the system allows for

comparison of changes in

forest area and carbon

content (and associated

GHG emissions) relative to

the baseline estimates used

for the REL/RL?

The system can be use for comparison.

Note:




33. Institutional

arrangements and

capacities.

a. Are mandates to perform

tasks related to forest

monitoring clearly defined

(e.g. satellite data

processing, forest

Yes, mandates are provided.

Note:

Presidential Regulation No. 16/2015 concerning the

Ministry of Environment and Forestry.



http://nfms.dephut.go.id/ipsdh/







inventory, information

sharing)?

Available at http://ditjenppi.menlhk.go.id/reddplus

/images/resources/peraturan

/Perpres_16_Tahun_2015-KLHK.pdf.


a transparent means of

publicly sharing forest and

emissions data are

presented and are in at

least an early operational

stage?

Websites are provided for sharing forest area, and

emissions data books are available.

Note:

Indonesia’s NFMS is available online at Indonesia’s

NFMS is available online at



c. Have associated resource

need has been identified

and estimated (e.g.

required capacities,

training,

hardware/software, and

budget)?

Associated resource needs have been identified and

estimated, but an updated budget plan is not provided

yet.

2.4.2 Information System for Multiple Benefit, Other Impacts, Governance, and Safeguards

This section will briefly describe the progress and major achievement on identification of relevant non-

carbon aspect, social and environmental issues; monitoring reporting and information sharing; and its

institutional arrangements and capacities.

Relevant non-carbon aspects as well as social and environmental issues have been addressed in Indonesia

very well. Mechanisms to address these issues have been operational in various sectors’ development

activities ,through mandatory requirement prior and post development projects, such as Environmental

Impact Assessment (EIA), Strategic Environmental Assessment (KLHS), and Environmental Audit.

Regulations for these mechanisms are Government Regulation No. 27/2012 concerning Environmental

Licenses, and the Minister of Environment Regulation No. 3/2013 concerning Environmental Audit.

Meanwhile, High Conservation Value Forest (HCVF) is currently voluntary for oil palm plantation, but there

is a growing discussion to make it mandatory.

Monitoring, reporting and information sharing purposes for non-carbon aspects and safeguards, have

been shared transparently in Indonesia, from local to national report. There are several mechanisms on

how these aspects are periodically reported. One of them is GHG Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting

(Pemantauan, Evaluasi dan Pelaporan Gas Rumah Kaca/PEP GRK) system led by National Planning Agency

from provincial level to national level. While from Indonesia to international forum, Indonesia’s 1st

Biennial Update Reports (BUR) has been submitted to the UNFCCC on 18 March 2016.

http://ditjenppi.menlhk.go.id/reddplus%20/images/resources/peraturan%20/Perpres_16_Tahun_2015-KLHK.pdf






In the same context, the Ministry of Environment and Forestry (MoEF) publishes the Statistics of

Environment and Forestry book annually. The Statistic book provides information regarding non-carbon

aspect from forestry sector and accessible on the MoEF website. The Statistics book is the final point of

reporting chain, from units in the district and provinces to relevant directorate generals in the MoEF, and

finally published as one of MoEF publication products.

Specific indicators, such as HDI, GINI ratio, and Bruto Domestic Income are available in each district and

Central Bureau of Statistics of Indonesia. These indicators need to be analyzed to address specific forestry

sectors issues, such as deforestation, forest degradation, forest and land fire, etc., in order to know the

progress of low emission development as aimed at the Indonesia’s NDC.

In addition, the MoEF has developed a system for providing information on how safeguards, are addressed

and respected. The National Safeguards Information System (SIS) was built on existing safeguards

systems, and has been tested in Central Kalimantan and East Kalimantan provinces. A web based

information system has been developed under the MoEF. The basic idea of REDD+ safeguards are within

the scope of sustainable forest management in Indonesia. Ministry of Forestry, as of October 2014, the

Ministry of Environment and Forestry (MoEF) embarked on a multi-stakeholder process to assess and

analyze various existing mandatory and voluntary policies and regulations. The criteria used in the

assessment were: relevance to COP-16 safeguards for REDD+ activities, limitations in scope of

instruments; and effectiveness of instruments at different scales and contexts.

In early 2011, the MoEF initiated discussions on the establishment of a Safeguards Information System for

REDD+ (SIS REDD+), in accordance with the obligation articulated in UNFCCC COP 16 Decision Annex 1

Paragraph 71D. This initiative aims to (UNORCID, 2015): (1) translated the Cancun Safeguards into the

national context, in the form of Principles and Criteria, (2) analyzed the existing instruments and policies

that are relevant to the Cancun safeguards, and an identification of gaps, (3) developed structure and

mechanism of information system for implementing REDD+ safeguards, (4) designed SIS-REDD+

institution, and (5) identified relevant Principles, Criteria and Indicators as components of the SIS.

The development of the Principles, Criteria and Indicators (PCI) was conducted during 2011 to 2012

involving multi-stakeholder participation through three national workshops, three Focus Group

Discussions and some major stakeholder consultations. The assessment and analysis process of the

existing instruments, which resulted in the initial PCI framework, was conducted through the following

steps (Center for Standardization and Environment, 2013):

- Identifying and prioritizing elements contained in existing instruments relevant to safeguards as

defined by the COP-16 Decision.

- Identifying clusters of elements or "common denominators”.

- Linking the emerging element clusters to safeguards in COP16 Decision.

- Mapping elements into Principles, Criteria and Indicators (PCI) framework and referencing back the

PCI to the original instruments.

The establishment of SIS REDD+ was conducted in two tracks process:

1) multi-stakeholders’ communication to develop institutional structure and discussing how the

system works (2011-2012), and develop tools to assess conformity of safeguards implementation

with Principle, Criteria, and Indicator (PCI) (2013)).


2) Consultant work, by identifying and assessing or analyzing the existing RPI’s to develop PCI, for SIS-

REDD+ Indonesia; establish institutional structure in SIS-REDD+; develop database system and web

based SIS.

During 2011–2012, series of multi-stakeholder discussions have been held to develop the SIS-REDD+. This

process was led by Ministry of Forestry (Center for Standardization and Environment/Pustanling), the

Presidential REDD+ Task Force (Satgas REDD+) and National Council on Climate Change (DNPI) (UNORCID,

2015). The major multi-stakeholder consultations, and the key points of progress from each of these

events, are summarized in Figure 2.12.

Figure 2.12 Process of Development and Operational of SIS-REDD+.

In the context of FCPF, and any other REDD+ readiness schemes, SIS REDD+ is positioned as an umbrella

of the safeguards for REDD+ implementation in Indonesia (UNORCID, 2015), such as Environmental Impact

Assessment (AMDAL), Strategic Environmental Assessment (KLHS), Sustainable Management of

Production Forest (PHPL), SFM Certification (LEI, FSC), System for Verification of Timber Legality (SVLK),

High Conservation Value Forest (HCVF), Free Prior Informed Consent (FPIC), including SESA, and others

(e.g. Rights-based safeguards, Partnership Governance Index, Legislation related to environmental

management, biodiversity conservation). These tools are used to evaluate safeguards systems in a way

that generates coherent and consistent information. The PCI’s were derived from the existing safeguards

related instruments, which further interpreted and translated into concrete practical assessment tools to

assess the conformity of safeguards implementation with the PCI. Institutional arrangements and

information flow has also been developed for SIS-REDD+, that were designed based on institutional

structures of the autonomous governance system (from Sub-national to national level), operating through


phased-based approach, while maintaining consistency with the COP-guidance for SIS-REDD+ (UNREDD,

2015). SIS-REDD+ can also be used to bridge safeguards interest on the international level with the

local/national level, by internalizing global guidance in existing systems and mechanisms in Indonesia. SIS-

REDD+ can also use the existing processes in Indonesia to boost the negotiation and implementation at

international level.

SIS-REDD+ was designed using the following principles: simplicity, completeness, accessibility, and

accountability. It was also designed in such way to allow the synergy and integration with any other

parallel safeguards related initiatives, that are applicable in the country, including the 3 (three) following

safeguards systems: PRISAI (Prinsip, Kriteria, Indikator Safeguards Indonesia), REDD+ SES (Social and

Environmental Safeguards), and REDD+ PGA (Participatory Governance Assessment) focusing on

transparent and effective forest governance (UNREDD, 2015).

SIS REDD+ (Figure 2.13) consists of 7 Principles, 17 Criteria, and 32 Indicators that were developed to

correspond directly to the relevant COP 16 Safeguards (CSE, 2013). The seven principles of SIS REDD+ are:

1) Legal Compliance and Consistency with National Forest Programs (3 criteria, 4 indicators)

2) Transparency and Effectiveness of National Forest Governance (2 criteria, 3 indicators)

3) Rights of Indigenous and Local Communities (4 criteria, 6 indicators)

4) Effectiveness of Stakeholder Participation (2 criteria, 6 indicators)

5) Conservation of Biodiversity, Social and Environmental Services (2 criteria, 6 indicators)

6) Reducing Risk of Reversals (2 criteria, 4 indicators)

7) Reduction of Emission Displacement (2 criteria, 3 indicators)

SIS REDD+ has been operating since 2014, under the DGCC. Web platform-based SIS REDD+ of Indonesia

(Figure 2.14) has been established (Rachmawaty, 2016), and it is accessible on

http://sisredd.menlhk.go.id. The main functions of SIS REDD+ is the development of the data base system

to manage data and information received by the SIS REDD+ management (PSIS NAS), and the development

of web-based information provision on safeguards implementation.

Currently, 11 out of 35 DA REDD+ and other REDD+ related activities in Indonesia have been registered to

SIS REDD+. In the current early stage of SIS-REDD+ operation, two approaches have been used

(Rachmawaty, 2016). The first approach is on the national level, REDD+ pilot project/activities

proponents/implementers report directly to the national SIS-REDD+ data management unit (Ministry of

Environment and Forestry), using a “self assessment approach to safeguards implementation”. The

second approach is on the Sub-national level, where Indonesia has exercised and tested the SIS-REDD+

mechanism in two provinces (Jambi Province and East Kalimantan Province), in order to see the possibility

to link the system at the national level to the existing forest related information systems in those two

provinces.


Figure 2.13 The book of SIS-REDD+ of Indonesia.


Figure 2.14 The performance of SIS-REDD+ of Indonesia in the website.

Progress and ongoing improvements of SIS REDD+ (Widyaningtyas, 2016) are: (1) 7 Principles, 17 Criteria,

and 32 Indicators, along with a set of Assessment Tools for respective indicators have been developed;

(2) institutional arrangement and information flow for SIS-REDD+ have been developed (Figure 2.15); (3)

a web based SIS-REDD+ in Indonesia has been developed, and operating after being tested at national and

provincial level, in Jambi and East Kalimantan; (4) summary of Information have been prepared to be

submitted through 3rd National Communication; and (5) strengthening REDD+ Safeguards implementation

and SIS operational, including customary law communities and other stakeholders in Sarolangun, South

Sumatra, in collaboration with the SESA-ESMF development.

Figure 2.15 Institutional structure and SIS REDD+ mechanism.

SIS REDD+ covers some aspects related to leakage, namely: types of emission displacement that are likely

to occur outside REDD+ activities within the national boundary, strategy for emission reductions, under

realistic scenarios that avoid emissions displacement outside areas of REDD+ activities within the national

boundary, and monitoring on forest-related emissions and carbon stocks changes for the area of REDD+

activities and emission displacement reduced outside area of REDD+ activities within the national

boundary. However, there is a need to address a policy/legal aspect to prevent and to overcome the

displacement.

Furthermore, the current results compared to expectations of SIS-REDD+ development showed that

Indonesia is facing some challenges: (1) institutional aspect in operating the SIS at the national level, there


is an organizational change as a challenge, with limited human resources; (2) self or voluntary assessment

in providing information, it needs high commitment on how to make information available; and (3)

maintaining the operation of the system requires synergy with other REDD+ safeguards-related system.

For the next step, Indonesia still concerns about creating legal umbrella for full operational of the SIS-

REDD+, along with other REDD+ architecture’s elements, improving capacity and commitment of

institutions responsible at the sub-national levels, synergy among results of parallel processes relating to

safeguards and SIS-REDD+ development, including SESA-ESMF, and getting local community to be more

involved in the SIS operational: awareness raising, and capacity building. There is a new instrument in

measuring non-carbon aspect, social and environmental issues and supporting SIS-REDD+ called the

Forest Governance Index 2014 (Situmorang et al., 2015). This book contains the important advances of

forest governance in Indonesia. The book includes the simple criteria and indicators which are described

comprehensively, prepared through a participatory approach, and recognize indigenous people.

Meanwhile, National Forestry Council and Provincial Forestry Council of Maluku Province have developed

guidance for effective engagement of indigenous people and local communities, that is mainly funded by

FCPF.

At the Sub-national level, a formal institution is needed to serve as a permanent role as SIS-REDD+

manager at sub-national levels, to ensure clear distribution of responsibilities and the sustainability of

information system. The formal institution does not need to be a new institution, but could utilize existing

agencies and strengthen their capacity. Human resources capacity and infrastructure vary widely at Sub-

national levels, and in general should be improved to allow effective data collection and reporting. This

applies both for the data managers at the Sub-national level, who are responsible to consolidate and verify

data, as well as REDD+ implementers at site level, who are expected to supply the information and

necessary documents.

Institutional arrangements and capacities on implementing information system and safeguards need to

be improved. There is a clear mandate to perform tasks related to non-carbon aspects and safeguards

from the RAN GRK document (the document of National Action Plan of GHG Emission Reduction), which

has been implemented through the RAD GRK (the document of Provincial Action Plan of GHG Emission

Reduction) in each province, and monitoring has already been conducted. DGCC of MoEF has identified

and estimated the needs of capacity building activities, training programs, software/hardware, and

budget. This identification results were stated in the annual work plan. Such activities have been initiated

both by national and international supports, and also by the National Development Planning Agency

through the RAN & RAD GRK.

At the regional level, there are Climate Change and Forest and Land Fires Offices (Balai Pengendalian

Perubahan Iklim dan Kebakaran Hutan dan Lahan/Balai PPI dan Karhutla), in which its regional office

under the DGCC throughout Indonesia. Balai PPI and Karhutla was established in 2015 with 5 Regional

Offices, one each for Sumatra, Java-Bali-Nusa Tenggara, Kalimantan, Sulawesi, and Maluku-Papua. One of

these offices’ functions is to support DGCC on the SIS development and safeguards implementation for

REDD+. As a new institution, Balai PPI and Karhutla has to be supported by DGCC and partners, because

of lack of human resources, both for quantity and capacity, as well as technical capacity.

The above explanations were also revealed during the REDD+ Readiness Assessment to Sub-component

4b of Information System for Multiple Benefits, Other Impacts, Governance, and Safeguards. The

Assessment concluded ‘significant progress’ for this Sub-component (Table 2.18). As previously explained,


relevant non-carbon aspect and social and environmental issues have been identified very well. National

regulations on Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), Strategic Environment Assessment (Kajian

Lingkungan Hidup Strategis/KLHS), High Conservation Value of Forest (HCVF), and Environmental Audit

are available (Criteria 34). In term of monitoring, reporting, and publishing, the non-carbon aspects and

safeguards have been published transparently from local to national report, e.g. Monitoring Evaluating

and Reporting of GHG (Pemantauan, Evaluasi, dan Pelaporan Gas Rumah Kaca/PEP GRK) by National

Development Planning Agency, from provincial level to national level, as well as BUR (Criteria 35). A clear

mandate from the National Action Plan for Green House Gas Emission Reduction (RAN GRK) has been

implemented in the Provincial Action Plan for Green House Gas Emission Reduction (RAD GRK) in each

province. Monitoring has already been conducted, and DGCC of MoEF has identified and estimated the

needs of capacity building activities, trainings, software/hardware, and budget. Such activities have been

implemented both with national and international assistance, and also by the National Development

Agency in the RAN & RAD GRK.

Table 2.18 Results of Sub-component 4b. Information System for Multiple Benefits, Other Impacts,

Governance, and Safeguards

Sub-component 4b. Information System for Multiple Benefits, Other Impacts,

Governance and Safeguards.

Criteria Diagnostic Questions Verifier

34. Identification of

relevant non-

carbon aspects, as

well as social and

environmental

issues.

How were the identifications of

the relevant non-carbon aspects,

as well as social and

environmental safeguard issues

of REDD+ preparations? Are

there any capacity building

recommendations associated

with these issues?

They have been identified very well. There are national

regulations on the Environmental Impact Assessment

(EIA), KLHS, HCVF and Environmental Audit.

Notes:

- Goverment Regulation No. 27/2012 concerning

Environmental Licences.

- Minister of Environment Regulation No. 3/2013

concerning Environmental Audit.

35. Monitoring,

reporting and

information

sharing.

a. Are there any evidences to

show transparent system for

periodically sharing

consistent information on

non-carbon aspects and

safeguards presented, and

are they in at least an early

operational stage?

Non-carbon aspects and safeguards have been shared

transparently from local to national reports. For instance:

GHG Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting (Pemantauan,

Evaluasi dan Pelaporan Gas Rumah Kaca/PEP GRK) by the

National Planning Agency in the provincial to national

levels, as well as the BUR. There is also Ministry of

Environment and Forestry Statistics, providing information

regarding non-carbon aspects on forestry sector.

Notes:

- The Ministry of Environment and Forestry Statistics,

available at http://www.menlhk.go.id/.

- PEP GRK online is available at http://www.sekretariat-

rangrk.org/beranda/82-bahasa/berita/176-sosialisasi-

pep.


Sub-component 4b. Information System for Multiple Benefits, Other Impacts,

Governance and Safeguards.

Criteria Diagnostic Questions Verifier

b. How are the following

information being made

available: key quantitative

and qualitative variables

about impacts on rural

livelihoods, conservation of

biodiversity, ecosystem

services provision, key

governance factors directly

pertinent to REDD+

preparations, as well as the

implementation of

safeguards and attention to

the specific provisions

included in the ESMF?

There are some Directorate Generals within The Ministry

of Environment and Forestry, the Provincial and District

Forestry Services, as well as the Forest Management Units

that have been widely collecting data. However, these

data collections need to be synchronized.

Indicators, e.g. HDI, Gini ratio and Gross Domestic Income

are available in each district. These indicators need to be

linked to the rate of deforestation in order to know the

progress of low emission development. The data of each

indicator is publicly accessible.

Note:

http://www.menlhk.go.id/

36. Institutional

arrangements and

capacities.

a. Are there clear definitions of

mandates to perform tasks

related to non-carbon

aspects and their safeguards?

There is a clear mandate from the document of the GHG

National Action Plan (Rencana Aksi Nasional Gas Rumah

Kaca/RAN GRK), as it has been implemented in the GHG

Regional Action Plan (Rencana Aksi Daerah Gas Rumah

Kaca/RAD GRK) on each province, while monitoring has

also been conducted.

Note:

Presidential Regulation No. 61 concerning GHG National

Action Plan Development.

b. Have the associated resource

needs been identified and

estimated (e.g. required

capacities, training,

hardware/software and

budget)?

DGCC of MoEF has been identified and estimated,

including for the needs of capacity building activities,

trainings, software/hardware and budget. Such activities

have been implemented both by national and

international assisstancy, and also by the National

Development Agency in the GHG National Action Plan

(Rencana Aksi Nasional Gas Rumah Kaca/RAN GRK) and

the GHG Regional Action Plan (Rencana Aksi Daerah Gas

Rumah Kaca/RAD GRK).

Note:

Strategic Planning of MoEF for 2015 - 2019 as stated by

Minister Regulation No. P.39/Menlhk-Setjen/2015,

including programmes and activities of DGCC for 2015 –

2019. Available at

http://ditjenppi.menlhk.go.id/program/program-tahun-

2015-2019.


Meanwhile, East Kalimantan Province has shown good progress in developing safeguards. East Kalimantan

Province has developed the REDD+ SES in 2013 as an adaptation of the International REDD+ SES. The

Preparation of Principles, Criteria and Indicators for REDD+ SES aims to reflect the specific characteristics

and needs of East Kalimantan Province (Pambudhi et al., 2015). The Principles, Criteria and Indicators have

been tested within a trial on REDD+ SIS monitoring activities in three Districts (Berau, Kutai and Paser).

East Kalimantan has also completed the identification study on the needs of adapting SES in East

Kalimantan in 2013 (Subekti et al., 2013). For this adaptation process, the needs of safeguards

development are adjusted to the local context of East Kalimantan, as the needs on the local context of

REDD+ safeguards have also been identified and formulated. The Indonesian Ecolabel Institute (Lembaga

Ekolabel Indonesia/LEI), in cooperation with the East Kalimantan REDD+ Task Force (supported by the

Clinton Climate Initiative and Conservation International), facilitated this adaptation process.

East Kalimantan has determined the REDD+ SES (REDD+ Social and Environmental Standards) of East

Kalimantan as a safeguard instrument to be used for the REDD+ implementation throughout the province.

This safeguard was adopted and adapted from a combination of several safeguards, in accordance with

the important issues and social characteristics in East Kalimantan. The safeguards of

instruments/frameworks/initiatives compared during the development of the REDD+ SES for East

Kalimantan are: REDD+ SES, PRISAI, SIS-REDD+, SESA and RBS (Rights Based Standard) (Pambudhi et al.,

2015).

After finalizing the platform, the environmental and social safeguards for REDD+ Readiness in East

Kalimantan were developed in a two-year period (2015-2016). This process had involved various key

stakeholders in the provincial and local levels, enriched by inputs from the national level stakeholders.

These stakeholders’ participation was engaged through discussions and policy dialogues by using various

media in order to get points of improvements.

In order to complete the existing progress of the safeguards development toward the REDD+

implementation in East Kalimantan, improvements in the technical and institutional aspects are needed

(GIZ Forclime, 2016). The technical aspect needs an analysis of synergies and integration of the REDD+

safeguards issues within the Provincial/District Forestry Information System (PFMIS/DFMIS), including

other instruments such as FSC, AMDAL, FLEG-T and others. While the institutional aspect is in need of gap

analysis on the existing information systems (capacities and structures) at the province level, identifying

SIS managers and verifiers at the provincial level (among others the Provincial Forestry Service, DDPI,

Provincial Environment Agency and Provincial Development Planning Agency), as well as training sessions

planning regarding the SIS-REDD+ management.

Basically, the REDD+ SES of East Kalimantan Province and the national SIS REDD+ have been developed

and tested (with one of the testing sites in East Kalimantan). Then, the next step needed is to operate the

SIS REDD+ and the REDD+ SES in East Kalimantan to mitigate potential social and environmental impacts.


3 GAP ANALYSIS AND WAY FORWARD

The REDD+ Readiness Self-Assessment for Indonesia (hereinafter called ‘the Assessment’) has been

described in Chapter 2, as it shows significant progress (81.25%) for all four components assessed:

Component 1 on the Readiness Organization and Consultation (with further development required),

Component 2 on the REDD+ Strategy Preparation (which is progressing well with

further development required), Component 3 on the Reference Emissions Levels/Reference Levels (with

significant progress) and Component 4 on the Monitoring Systems for Forests, and Safeguards (with

significant progress). These have shown the opportunity for Indonesia to continue its efforts in the

development required, to finalize those initiatives that have been progressing well, and to

implement/operate the completed REDD+ elements. In parallel to the nationally initiated and financed

REDD+ activities, Indonesia has welcomed bilateral, regional and international cooperations to implement

the NDC, including the REDD+ implementation as the main component from land use sector that facilitates

and expedites the technology development and transfer, payment for performance, technical

cooperation and access to financial resources to support Indonesia’s climate mitigation and adaptation

efforts towards a climate resilient future3.

In order to determine the way forward, a gap analysis on the strengths and weaknesses in the REDD+

preparation was conducted as further strategies/activities necessary are identified based on the

Assessment. Table 0.1 summarizes the gap analysis on the strengths and weaknesses in the REDD+

preparation and further strategies/activities necessary.

Table 3.1 Strengths and weaknesses analysis and proposed strategy to completing the Readiness Phase

Component/

Sub-component Strength Weakness Activity/Strategy

Component 1. Readiness Organization and Consultation.

Sub-component 1a.

National REDD+

Management

Arrangement.

- The MoEF has two institutions with climate change nomenclature. The first one is the DGCC (under the MoEF), an institution for national REDD+ management arrangement and implementation. The second one is the Research and

- Lack of coordination among institutions and agencies (the Ministry of Finance, the National Planning Agency, and other sectoral agencies such as in agriculture, mining, agrarian or other sectors).

- Lack of human resource capacity for local

- Intensification in coordination process is needed by DGCC.

- Technical supervision capacity for local governments (provincial and district administrations) and DGCC regional offices.

- Capacity building on feed back and grievance redress

3 First Nationally Determined Contribution – Republic of Indonesia. 2016.

http://www4.unfccc.int/ndcregistry/PublishedDocuments/Indonesia%20First/First%20NDC%20Indonesia

_submitted%20to%20UNFCCC%20Set_November%20%202016.pdf


Component/


Development Center for Social, Economic, Forest Policy and Climate Change, a research and development center that focuses on science in climate change.

- There are five DGCC regional offices to support sub-national REDD+ implementation, covering Sumetera, Kalimantan, Java-Bali-Nusa Tenggara, Sulawesi and Maluku-Papua regions.

- There are also other institutions in Indonesia supporting the agenda of climate change and REDD+ readiness and implementations, such as the Indonesia’s Agency for Agriculture Research and Development (IAARD), CIFOR, ICRAF, IPB, UGM, and other universities in Indonesia.

governments and DGCC regional offices.

- Feed back and grievance redress mechanism is available, but not specially for the REDD+ purpose.

mechanism on the REDD+ purpose for responsible institutions.

- To develop a grievance redress mechanism at the sub-national level.

Sub-component 1b.

Consultation,

Participation and

Outreach.

- Strong nested government with decentralization system.

- A lot of REDD+ projects and initiatives have been supporting the process of consultation, participation and outreach activities.

- The existing consultation, participation and outreach processes have not reached all entities across the country. The major challenge is Indonesia being a very large country. It consists of 34 provinces and 514 districts/municipalities, with a complex national circumstance, including the stakeholders, sectors, interests, ethnicities, as well as various layers of communities and groups.

- Continuing consultation, participation and outreach process over Indonesia with various printed and online media.

- Consultation, participation and outreach on the framework of REDD+ strategies and implementations should be conducted in Indonesia’s multilayered entities.

- Priority is given to the sub-national level as a potential site for REDD+ scheme.

- Improving advocation approach on dissemination strategy.


Component/


Component 2. REDD+ Strategy Preparation.

Sub-component 2a.

Assessment of Land

Use, Land-Use

Change Drivers,

Forest Law, Policy

and Governance.

- There are lots of studies and assessment processes on land-use and land-use changes issued by various institutions, both on the national and sub-national scales.

- There are land-use regulations (such as moratorium, one map policy, etc.) to support the REDD+ and good forest governance.

- Tenure right is a main constraint to support the implementation of land-use regulations.

- There is no data management system for the critical spatial and statistical information related to emission reduction program.

- Land rights assessment is needed to provide clear land-use policy for REDD+.

- To develop and establish data management system for the critical spatial and statistical information related to emission reduction program.

Sub-component 2b.

REDD+ Strategy

Options.

- There is a REDD+ National Strategy and REDD+ Provincial Strategy developed by the central and provincial governments as the basis for low-carbon development planning and implementation.

- There is a high political will from the President of the Republic of Indonesia.

- Not all local political interests at the sub-national levels are supporting the REDD+ strategy.

- The sectoral communities have yet to understand the National REDD+ Strategy.

- The role of REDD+ is not properly determined within Indonesia’s NDC.

- Mainstreaming the REDD+ Strategy in all sub-national levels to strengthen their local development plannings and strategies (in the provincial and district levels).

- Intensive communication with related sectors is needed at the national and sub-national levels.

- To start the facilitation process for the positioning of REDD+ in the current commitment of Indonesia’s NDC.

Sub-component 2c.

Implementation

Framework.

- Laws and regulations are available as the legal basis to implement low carbon development.

- The National REDD+ registry system is available.

- Lack of adoption and implementation of laws and regulations by private sectors, in their relations with the low carbon development.

- Institutional, authority and procedures in issuing the REDD+ business permit at the protected forest areas are not clear.

- The National REDD+ registry system is not yest disseminated to the

- Advance policies that enhance the roles and participation of related private sectors within the law on carbon development process (in forestry, plantation, agriculture, mining and other sectors, both for mineral and peatland areas).

- To provide academic papers in developing regulation on the REDD+ business permit, in order to


Component/


responsible and relevant entities.

improve the Ministerial Decree/Regulation on the REDD+ permit procedure.

- Sosialization and dissemination of REDD+ registry are needed.

Sub-component 2d.

Social and

Environmental

Impacts.

- Similar systems are available and functioning as the complementary to SESA.

- There is a compilation of background information for the development of SESA Final Report and preparation of ESMF. The report stated that more than 400 activities related to SESA have been found in Indonesia.

Difficulties in bringing

synergy initiatives within the

country in relation to the

social and environmental

safeguards to create the

SESA and ESMF document.

Finalization of SESA and

ESMF documents.

Sub-component 2e.

Funding Instrument

and Benefit Sharing

Mechanism.

Funding instrument:

- There are the existing committed funding sources.

- There are potential funding sources, including on domestic sources.

- Lack of participation from private sectors on the REDD+ financing.

- There is no sufficient legal aspect to support the funding scheme.

- Exploring the roles of private sectors and developing an environmental funding scheme from domestic private sectors.

- Accelerating the development of the Government Regulation, other statutory laws and related minister technical decrees.

Benefit sharing

mechanism:

- There are the existing vertical and horizontal benefit sharing mechanisms in the national and sub-national levels, such as the Fiscal Transfer, Trust Funds, National Community Empowerment Programs (PNPM) and General Services Agency (Badan Layanan Umum/BLU).

- There is no available adoption of the existing procedural and legal frameworks at the national and sub-national levels.

- The existing mechanisms available must be developed, adjusted and adopted for the REDD+ benefit sharing mechanism.


Component/


- Lots of lessons learned and the experience of REDD+ Demonstration Activities and projects at the site level for horizontal benefit sharing mechanism.


Reference Emission

Levels/Reference

Levels.

FREL document with

strong methodology,

participatory process and

relevant expertise

involvement has been

submitted.

- Lack of national - sub-national correlation in the jurisdiction boundary.

- Different year-bases used for varied scheme requirements.

- Developing the standard of national - sub-national correlations on determining the sub-national FREL.

- Developing a methodology or approach to synchronize varied year-bases for different purposes.

Component 4. Monitoring System for Forest and Safeguards.

Sub-component 4a.

National/Sub-

national Forest

Monitoring System.

- NFMS and other forest monitoring-related systems have been established.

- National and sub-national institutions are available to conduct NFMS.

- There are other activities on forest and carbon monitoring developed by projects, Demonstration Activities and other REDD+-related programs (such as the FCPF, INCAS, etc.) as the important sources of data support.

- The system is still highly uncertain.

- The land cover data cannot detect forest regrowth and degradation.

- The system has yet to be capable of assessing and dealing with the displacement of emission (leakage) and reversals (non-permanence).

- Lack of data validation process. The process will strengthen the data quality.

- Other initiatives related to measurement and monitoring at the ground level need to be harmonized, synergetic and aggregated to the national level.

- Developing additional

PSP’s to reduce

uncertainty.

- Improving land cover data

to detect forest regrowth

and degradation.

- Improving REDD+ policy,

REDD+ management

arrangements, NFMS and

safeguards to cover

leakage and non-

permanence, both on the

conceptual framework and

practical guidelines.

- Data validation process is

needed, such as by

comparing land cover map

to the post classification

field data for all time

periods.

- Developing a clear

mechanisms and

procedures to facilitate the

compilation and scaling-up

of existing initiatives and


Component/


ongoing activities into

robust national capacity.

Sub-component 4b.

Information System

for Multiple

Benefits, Other

Impacts, Governance

and Safeguards.

- National regulations and environment assessment instruments are available.

- Monitoring system of GHG and other non-carbon aspect is available.

- SIS-REDD+ is ready to be operated.

- Legitimacy of SIS-REDD+ is low without any legal foundation.

- Lack of coordination among agencies that possess forest related data (such as the potency of forest products, forest carbon, environmental services, socio-economic of forest, etc.) at the national and sub-national levels.

- Lack of synergy among the REDD+ safeguards-related system.

- Limited human resources for responsible institutions at the sub-national level to operate the SIS REDD+.

- Limited community involvement in the SIS operational.

- Formalizing legal aspect for the full implementation of SIS-REDD+.

- Capacity building for responsible institutions at the sub-national level.

- Synergy among agencies collecting forest related data.

- Synergy among existing parallel safeguards.

- Community awareness in the raising and the capacity building of SIS-REDD operational.

The proposed strategies/activities listed in the table above are the expected contributions to improve

what have been conducted during the REDD+ Readiness Phase in Indonesia. FCPF, as well as other entities,

could prioritize their involvements into these activities, both at the national and sub-national levels.

Activities that have potential strategic impacts (such as the enhanced coordination process, advanced

policy on funding instruments and benefit sharing mechanisms, as well as the low-carbon development,

etc.) are better to be carried out in the national scale. Meanwhile, for the activities that have been readied

for operation and implementation, further process of development/implementation is directed to the

selected sub-national levels, e.g. East Kalimantan Province selected for the FCPF Carbon Fund scheme. It

will cover area approximately 12.9 million hectares (East Kalimantan is Indonesia’s second largest

province, and comprises 6.7% of the country’s land area), and consists of 6,819,163 ha forest area (see at

https://www.forestcarbonpartnership.org/sites/fcp/files/2016/May/Indonesian%20ER-

PIN%2020160429%20Final.pdf).

The REDD+ scheme has been in a theoretical arena since its inception, and has very limited examples of

success stories of its implementation. The choice of REDD+ to focus in a particular sub-national level is

encouraged to support national efforts and can become an example for other sub-national levels. Another

opportunity of the FCPF significant role to support the REDD+ Indonesia is to take a lead on bringing

synergy and integrating the REDD+ activities, both at the national and sub-national levels, particularly in




East Kalimantan. The synergy and integration among agencies that provide data, information and

safeguards, as well as the aggregation of forest carbon data in the context of MRV system, are among the

choices of activities.

The following table will provide a timeline of proposed strategies/activities indicating the priority for

REDD+ implementation. The criteria of priorities are the key element for REDD+ implementation, the high

risk of cancellation of its implementation if it is not conducted, and the possible available funding.

Table 3.2 Timeline and priority setting of improvements

Component/

Sub-Component Activity/Strategy

Priority

Level

Completion Time Responsible

Entity

Possible

Funding 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

Component 1 Readiness Organization and Consultation

Sub component

1a. National

REDD+

management

arrangement

- Intensification in coordination process is needed by DGCC.

I DGCC APBN

- Technical supervision capacity for local governments (provinces and districts) and DGCC regional offices.

II DGCC APBN, other resources (cooperation-based)

- Capacity building on the feedback and grievance redress mechanism on the REDD+ purpose for responsible institutions.

I DGCC FCPF, other

resources

(cooperation-

based)

- Develop a grievance redress mechanism at the sub-national level.

I DGCC, Provincial Forestry Services

FCPF, APBN

Sub component

1b. Consultation,

participation and

outreach

- Continuing consultation, participation and outreach process over Indonesia with various printed and online media.

II DGCC, Local Government, Project Proponents, NGO’s

APBN, APBD, other cooperation-based resources (including FCPF),

- Consultation, participation and outreach on the REDD+ strategies and implementation framework should be conducted within Indonesia’s multilayered entities.

II DGCC, Local Government, Project Proponents, NGO’s


- Priority is given to sub national level as a potential site for the REDD+ scheme.

I DGCC, Local Government, Project Proponents, NGO’s



Component/


Priority

Level


Entity

Possible

Funding 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

- Improving advocation approach on dissemination strategy.

I DGCC, Local Government, Project Proponents, NGO’s


Component 2 REDD+ Strategy Preparation

Sub component

2a. Assessment of

land use, land use

change drivers,

forest law, policy

and governance

- Land rights assessment is needed to provide clear land-use policy for REDD+.

I Priority province (East IKalimantan) – by FOEDIA and DGCC

FCPF

- Developing and establishing data management system for critical spatial and statistical information related to emission reduction program

I Priority province (East IKalimantan) – by FOEDRIA and DGCC

FCPF

Sub component

2b. REDD+

strategy options

- Mainstreaming REDD+ Strategy in all sub-national levels to strengthen their local development planning and strategy (provincial and district levels).

II DGCC, DDPI and Provincial Forestry Service (for East Kalimantan Province), NGO


- Intensive communication with related sectors is needed at the national and sub-national levels.

II DGCC, local government, NGO


- Facilitation process for positioning the REDD+ in the current commitment of Indonesia’s NDC.

I DGCC APBN, APBD, other cooperation-based resources (including FCPF),

Sub component

2c.

Implementation

framework

- Advanced policies that enhance the roles and participation of related private sectors in low carbon development process (in the sectors of forestry, plantation, agriculture, mining, or others, both for mineral and peatland areas).

I FOERDIA (for East Kalimantan Province)

FCPF

- Providing academic paper to develop the regulation on the REDD+ business permit in order to improve the Ministerial Decre/Regulation on REDD+ permit procedure.

II MoEF APBN, other cooperation-based resources (including FCPF)


Component/


Priority

Level


Entity

Possible

Funding 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

- Sosialization and desimination of REDD+ registry is needed.


Sub component

2d. Social and

environmental

impacts

Finalization of SESA and

ESMF documents.

I DGCC FCPF

Sub component

2e. Funding

instrument and

benefit sharing

mechanism

- Exploring the role of private sectors, as well as developing an environmental funding scheme from domestic and private sectors.

II DGCC, FOERDIA, DDPI

Other resources, FCPF

- Accelerating the development of the Government Regulation, other statutory laws and related minister technical decrees.

II DGCC, FOERDIA

APBN, other resources

- The existing mechanisms available need to be developed, adjusted and adopted for the REDD+ benefit sharing mechanism


Component 3. Reference Emission Level/Reference Level

Reference

emission

level/reference

level

- Developing standards of national - sub-national correlations on determining the sub-national FREL

II DGCC FPCF

- Developing the methodology or approach for synchronizing varied year-bases for different purposes.

II DGCC FPCF

Component 4. Monitoring System for Forest and Safeguards

Sub component

4a. National

forest monitoring

system

- Developing additional

PSP’s to reduce

uncertainty.

I FOERDIA FCPF

- Improving land cover data

to detect forest regrowth

and degradation.

II MoEF APBN, other

resources


Component/


Priority

Level


Entity

Possible

Funding 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

- Improving the REDD+

policy, the REDD+

management

arrangements, the NFMS

and safeguards to cover

leakage and non-

permanence, both on the

conceptual framework

and practical guidelines.

I DGCC,

FOERDIA, East

Kalimantan

(DDPI)

FCPF

- Data validation process is

needed, such as by

comparing land cover

map to the post

classification field data for

all time periods.

II MoEF, East

Kalimantan

FCPF

- Developing clear

mechanisms and

procedures to facilitate

the compilation and

scaling-up of existing

initiatives and ongoing

activities into robust

national capacity.

II MoEF APBN, other

resources

Sub component

4b. Information

system for

multiple benefits,

other impacts,

governance, and

safeguards

- Formalizing legal aspects for the full implementation of SIS-REDD+.

I DGCC APBN

- Capacity building for responsible institutions at the sub-national level.

I DGCC APBN, APBD, other cooperation-based resources (including FCPF)

- Creating synergy among agencies that collect forest related data at the national and sub national levels.

I DGCC APBN, other resources

- Synergy among existing parallel safeguards.


- Raising the community awareness and applying capacity building.


East Kalimantan Province was selected as a pilot province for the FCPF Carbon Fund, which is planned for

implementation in 2018 to 2024. Carbon Fund is not the goal, but has become part of a long term

development plan of the East Kalimantan Province with an objective to reduce land based GHG emissions

in supporting the transition of the province to low carbon economy. The ERPD for East Kalimantan

Province is being developed, as some of the REDD+ architectures or aspects are still in need of

developments. Therefore, the FCPF Additional Fund will be prioritized to support the development of East


Kalimantan Province, as summarized in Table 3.2 above. In general, the activities required in East

Kalimantan are: (a) activities related to spatial data (development of PSP’s, MRV and FREL), (b) social and

environmental safeguards (including the grievance and redress mechanism, as well as land rights), (c)

financial, (d) internalization of the emission reduction program into a long term development plan, and

(e) capacity building.

At the national level, by considering the current progress achieved by Indonesia (including by the

Indonesian government itself with support from various development partners), the country is pursuing

a full implementation of REDD+ in the near future. Indonesia needs to finalize its funding instrument and

the REDD+ funding mechanism. Indonesia is also encouraging the implementation of REDD+ architecture

elements (including FREL, MRV and SIS-REDD+) in a sustainable way to obtain result-based payment

(including Carbon Fund and Bio Carbon Fund in FCPF), as well as boosting a contribution of REDD+ on the

achievement of national emission reduction target (NDC). In addition, Indonesia has been consistent in

conducting awareness raising and capacity building within its multilayer entities. Therefore, in the FCPF

Additional Fund, Indonesia proposes the activities to support related facilitation processes (which are

positioning REDD+ within the NDC, facilitation of REDD+ Result-Based Payment, operational of REDD+

National Registry System, awareness raising and capacity building, and others).

4 PARTICIPATORY SELF-ASSESSMENT PROCESS

4.1 Scope and Scale

Indonesia’s REDD+ Readiness Self-Assessment Document is prepared to report the self-assessment

processes and results of the REDD+ implementation in Indonesia, within the concept of national approach

and sub-national implementation. This document is equipped by a brief progress of the REDD+

implementation in the provinces of East Kalimantan and South Sumatra. The two were selected as samples

for the following reasons:

1) These provinces have high forest areas and high number of biodiversity.

2) There are varied initiatives on programs related to REDD+ facilitated by multiple agencies, among

others the Central Government (Ministry of Forestry), The Nature Conservancy (TNC), and GIZ-

Forclime, as well as the World Wild Fund (WWF).

3) These provinces need additional mechanisms to support local government’s commitment in

creating conceptual and practical resolution on how to manage their own natural resources in

sustainable way.

4) These provinces are part of the pilot provinces for the REDD+ implementation model at the national

scale, according to the REDD+ Task Force in 2010.

The scope of the REDD+ Readiness Self-Assessment covers all of the main readiness activities, either

activities funded by Indonesia’s National budget or other partnering institutions (within bilateral, regional,

multinational and international collaborations), including the consultation and readiness strategies,

reference level and monitoring system design, as well as the multisectoral issues resolutions such as

within the governance, environment, social and economy.


4.2 Framework

The main concept of REDD+ Readiness is the environmental incentive through integrated REDD+ actions.

It includes the vertical integrations of entities (e.g. national – sub-national communities), horizontal

integrations (e.g. collaboration among communities, forest management units, private companies, or

other REDD+ proponents), as well as the temporal integrations (the unity of time in a bundle of

agreement).

This concept was then divided into four components according to the FCPF Readiness Assessment

Framework (hereinafter called the FCPF Guideline)4, namely: (1) readiness organization and consultation,

(2) REDD+ strategy preparation, (3) reference emission level/reference level, and (4) monitoring system

for forest and safeguards. In line with these components, Indonesia has developed a REDD+

infrastructure5. It consists of (1) Policy and Strategy, (2) Reference Emission Level (REL), (3) Monitoring

Reporting and Verification (MRV) system, (4) Safeguards, (5) Funding Instruments, and (6) Benefit Sharing

Mechanism.

The assessment of those components is a crucial step to discover the status of preparation conducted by

Indonesia during the REDD+ Readiness Phase. The assessment covers the process and results of the

Readiness Phase in Indonesia.

The FCPF mentioned that many countries are experiencing varied national circumstances and specific

characteristics; this is relevant only if the assessment is to be conducted by each country (FCPF, 2013).

Therefore, the REDD+ Readiness Self-Assessment (hereinafter called ‘the Assessment) was conducted

through the participatory processes of stakeholders representing the REDD+ entities in Indonesia.

Individuals representing the central government, provincial governments, district governments,

communities, forest management units, academia, NGOs, private companies, donors and other

independent institutions were involved to discuss and assess the REDD+ readiness implementation in

Indonesia.

4.3 Processes

The Assessment process refers to the FCPF Guideline (FCPF, 2013). According to the framework, the

process on developing document consists of three main stages, namely the preparation for the

assessment, conducting of the assessment and communicating the assessment’s outcome. The following

sub-sections will briefly describe the processes conducted in Indonesia. The reports and related

documents are available on http://puspijak.org/index.php/front/content/fcpf.

4 FCPC. 2013. A Guide to the FCPF Readiness Assessment Framework. The World Bank. Washington DC.

5 Ministry of Forestry. 2008. IFCA 2007 Consolidation Report: Reducing Emission from Deforestation and

Forest Degradation in Indonesia. Forestry Research and Development Agency, Ministry of Forestry of

the Republic of Indonesia. Jakarta.

http://puspijak.org/index.php/front/content/fcpf


4.3.1 Preparing for the Assessment

4.3.1.1 Identification of organizing team, facilitator and sponsor

An organizing team is crucial for the whole process of self-assessment and REDD+ Readiness Self-

Assessment development. The Research Center for Social, Economy, Forest Policy and Climate Change

(Pusat Penelitian dan Pengembangan Sosial, Ekonomi, Kebijakan dan Perubahan Iklim/P3SEKPI) of the

Forestry Research, Development, and Innovation Agency (Badan Penelitian, Pengembangan, dan Inovasi

Kehutanan/BLI) of the Ministry of Environment and Forestry (Kementerian Lingkungan Hidup dan

Kehutanan/KLHK), in collaboration with several consultants, had worked for three months to organize and

facilitate the self-assessment activities and REDD+ Readiness Self-Assessment document development.

The FCPF-World Bank and Indonesia’s National Budget System (Anggaran Pendapatan dan Belanja

Negara/APBN) have funded all of these processes.

4.3.1.2 Development of a process and schedule, as well as allocating budget

The literature review, multi-stakeholder meetings and document writing have all been conducted within

a three-month schedule, from August to October 2016. In August, the activities were focused on

preparation phase, including on organizing team and facilitator identification, proposing sponsor, as well

as the stakeholders’ identification. Assessment events had started from the first week of September 2016,

both at the national and sub-national levels (Table 0.1).

Table 4.1 Time schedule for developing REDD+ Readiness Self-Assessment Document


4.3.1.3 Identification of stakeholder participation

Various stakeholders have been identified and invited, before attending the self-assessment processes

conducted in the form of Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) within four workshops in the national and sub-

national levels. Table 0.2 contains the summary of the participants’ institution types and gender

representations.

Table 4.2 Participants of self-assessment

The stakeholders attending the workshops are as follow:

4.3.1.3.1 Inception Workshop, National Level, September 1st, 2016

Government Institutions

1) Directorate of Green House Gas Inventory, Directorate General of Climate Change, Ministry of

Environment and Forestry

2) Directorate of Mitigation, Directorate General of Climate Change, Ministry of Environment and

Forestry

3) Directorat of Mobilization, Directorate General of Climate Change, Ministry of Environment and

Forestry

4) Directorate of Forest Resource Inventory, Directorate General of Planology, Ministry of


5) Center for Standardization of Environment, Ministry of Environment and Forestry

6) Directorate of Law, Secretariate General of the Ministry of Environment and Forestry

7) Climate Change Task Force, Ministry of Environment and Forestry

8) National Secretariat of National Action Plan for Green House Gas Emission Reduction, National

Development Planning Agency of Indonesia


9) Coordinating Ministry for Economics

10) Ministry of Agriculture, The Republic of Indonesia

11) Ministry of Finance, The Republic of Indonesia

12) Indonesian National Institute of Aeronautics and Space (Lembaga Penerbangan dan Antariksa

Nasional/LAPAN), The Republic of Indonesia

13) Geospatial Information Agency of Indonesia (Badan Informasi Geospasial/BIG), The Republic of

Indonesia

Non-Governmental Organizations

14) The Nature Conservancy (TNC)

15) World Wildlife Fund (WWF) Indonesia

16) Flora & Fauna International (FFI) – Indonesia Program

17) World Resource Institute (WRI) – Indonesia Program

18) Indegenous People Alliance of the Archipelago (Aliansi Masyarakat Adat Nusantara/AMAN)

International Agencies

19) JICA

20) GIZ-Forclime

21) IJ-REDD+

22) United Nation Development Programme (UNDP)

23) AFOCO

24) The World Bank

25) Royal Norwegian Embassy

Research and Academic Institutions

26) Bogor Agricultural University (Institut Pertanian Bogor/IPB)

27) ICRAF

28) Research and Development Center for Social, Economy, Forest Policy and Climate Change

29) Research Center for Forest and Conservation

30) CCROM, IPB

31) PSP3, IPB

Private Sectors

32) PT Inhutani I Labanan (Proponent of DA-REDD+)

33) PT Sumalindo Jaya IV (Proponent of DA-REDD+)

34) PT Global Alam Lestari (Proponent of REDD+ Permit Holder)

4.3.1.3.2 Virtual Survey, National Level, September 6th – October 16th, 2016

A virtual survey was then conducted to verify the results of the Inception workshop. Experts invited for

the virtual survey are listed in Annex 5.

4.3.1.3.3 Sub-national Workshop, East Kalimantan Province, October 7th, 2016

Local Government Institutions


1) Provincial Forestry Service of East Kalimantan Province

2) Provincial Development Planning Agency of East Kalimantan Province

3) Regional Council on Climate Change (Dewan Daerah Perubahan Iklim/DDPI) of East Kalimantan

4) REDD+ Task Force of East Kalimantan Province

5) District Forestry Service of Berau District

6) REDD+ Task Force of Berau District

Technical Implementation Unit of the Central Government at the Sub-National Level

7) Forest Area Consolidation Office (Balai Pemantapan Kawasan Hutan/BPKH Wilayah IV), East

Kalimantan

8) Natural Resources Conservation Office (Balai Konservasi Sumber Daya Alam/BKSDA), East

Kalimantan

Research and Academics Institutions

9) Dipterocarp Research Center, Samarinda

10) Research Institute for Natural Resource Conservation Technology, Samboja

11) Center for Climate Change Studies (C3S, Mulawarman University)

12) TESD, Mulawarman University

13) CEBERES, Mulawarman University

14) CSF, Mulawarman University


15) GIZ Forclime of East Kalimantan

16) GIZ GELAMAI

17) The Nature Conservancy, Berau Programme

Local NGOs

18) WWF of East Kalimantan

19) GGGI

20) Yayasan BIOMA

21) Yayasan STABIL

22) SERUMPUN

23) Indegenous People Alliance of the Archipelago (Aliansi Masyarakat Adat Nusantara/AMAN), East

Kalimantan Office

Private Sectors

24) PT Inhutani Labanan, Samarinda Office (Proponent of DA-REDD)

25) PT Sumalindo Jaya IV, Samarinda Office (Proponent of DA-REDD)

Communities

26) Long Duhung Village Representative, Berau District

27) Merabu Village Representative, Berau District

28) Communication Forum for Hulu Kelay Community, Berau District


4.3.1.3.4 Sub-national Workshop, South Sumatra Province, October 10th, 2016

Local Government Institutions

1) Forestry Service of South Sumatra Province

2) Planning Agency of South Sumatra Province

3) Agriculture Service of South Sumatra Province

4) REDD+ Task Force of South Sumatra Province

5) Forest Management Unit of Lalan Mangsang Mendis, Musi Banyuasin District

6) REDD+ Task Force of Musi Rawas District

Technical Implementation Units of the Central Government at the Sub-National Level

7) Forest Area Consolidation Office (Balai Pemantapan Kawasan Hutan/BPKH Wilayah II), South

Sumatra

8) Natural Resources Conservation Office (Balai Konservasi Sumber Daya Hutan/BKSDA), South

Sumatra

9) Production Forest Monitoring Office (Balai Pemantauan Pengelolaan Hutan Produksi/BP2HP),

South Sumatra

10) Institute for Forest Seedlings (Balai Perbenihan Tanaman Hutan) of South Sumatra


11) GIZ – Bioclime

12) WWF

13) GIZ LAMA-I

Research and Academics Institutions

14) Sriwijaya University, Palembang

15) Environment and Forestry Research and Development Institute, Palembang

16) Institute of Agricultural Science (Sekolah Tinggi Ilmu Pertanian/STIPER), Palembang

Private Sectors

17) PT Global Alam Lestari (Proponent of Carbon Permit Holder)

Local NGOs

18) Wahana Bumi Hijau

Communities

19) Muara Merang Village Representative, Bayung Lencir Sub District, Musi Banyuasin District

20) Kepayang Village Representative, Bayung Lencir Sub District, Musi Banyuasin District

4.3.1.3.5 Validation Workshop, National Level, October 25th, 2016

Government institutions

1) Coordinating Ministry on Economy

2) South Sumatra Provincial Forestry Service

3) South Sumatra Provincial Development Planning Agency


4) Directorate of Forest Resource Inventory, Directorate General of Planology, Ministry of


5) Directorate of Green House Gas Inventory, Directorate General of Climate Change, Ministry of


6) Center for Standardization of Environment, Ministry of Environment and Forestry

7) Indonesian National Institute of Aeronautics and Space (Lembaga Penerbangan dan Antariksa

Nasional/LAPAN), the Republic of Indonesia

8) Regional Council on Climate Change (Dewan Daerah Perubahan Iklim/DDPI) of East Kalimantan

Non-Governmental Organizations

9) The Nature Conservancy (TNC)

10) World Wild Fund (WWF)

11) Flora & Fauna International (FFI) – Indonesia Program

12) World Resource Institute (WRI) – Indonesia Program


13) The World Bank

14) IJ-REDD+

15) GIZ-Forclime

16) Royal Norwegian Embassy

Research and Academic Institutions

17) Research and Development Center for Social, Economy, Forest Policy and Climate Change

(P3SEKPI), Forestry Research, Development, and Innovation Agency, Ministry of Environment and

Forestry (FORDIA, MoEF)

18) Agricultural Land Resources Agency, Ministry of Agriculture

19) Sriwijaya University

20) CCROM, IPB

21) Faculty of Forestry, IPB

22) Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR)

23) The World Agroforestry Centre (ICRAF)

Private Sectors

24) PT Hatfield Indonesia

25) PT Waindo Specterra

26) PT Global Alam Lestari

27) PT Daemeter Consulting

28) PT Rimba Makmur Utama


4.3.2 Conducting the Assessment

4.3.2.1 Preparation of events

Designing the assessment process and developing the REDD+ Readiness Self-Assessment must also

consider the following aspects:

1) There are enormous relevant participants and stakeholders throughout Indonesia to be involved in

the assessment processes.

2) Various aspects or components of the REDD+ and land-use should be addressed.

3) Specific national circumstances in Indonesia, such as the government systems (presidential and

local authonomy), cultures, as well as its biogeographic and ecological diversity.

Therefore, these assessment events were designed to include as much stakeholders as possible, with as

many diversed topics as possible. The assessment processes consist of four events, described briefly as

follows:

4.3.2.1.1 Inception workshop

Inception workshop had been conducted at the National Level on September 1st, 2016, in Jakarta. This

workshop had aimed at:

1) Informing self-assessment activities of REDD+ Readiness in Indonesia to relevant stakeholders.

2) Updating the progress of REDD+ Readiness Phase in Indonesia.

3) Identifying and agreeing the methodology of self-assessment, as well as the criteria and evidences

used in the assessment.

4) Conducting self-assessment of the REDD+ Readiness Phase for Indonesia.

This workshop’s outcomes are:

1) Current progress of the REDD+ readiness in Indonesia until 2016.

2) Methodology options for self-assessment of the REDD+ Readiness in Indonesia.

3) Self-assessment results of the REDD+ readiness at the national level.

4.3.2.1.2 Virtual Survey

A virtual survey has been designed to collect inputs, corrections and opinions for the first self-

assessment results from the National Inception Workshop conducted on September 1st, 2016. The

survey is a way to validate, and part of the triangulation techniques, by involving experts across

Indonesia. Such experts came from various REDD+ related field of expertise, among others: policy,

FREL/RL, MRV, forest and carbon inventory, social and environmental safeguards, funding, as well as

benefit sharing mechanism. They also came from various backgrounds, such as academicians,

researchers, government officers, NGOs, as well as international organizations. The survey was

conducted from September 26th to October 16th, 2016. Twenty-one experts were contacted, where 30%

of them participated in the survey and provided invaluable input to the Self-Assessment results.

4.3.2.1.3 Sub-national Workshops


Sub-national Workshops were conducted at selected sub-national levels, namely in East Kalimantan

Province on October 7th, 2016, in Samarinda, as well as in South Sumatra Province on October 10th, 2016

in Palembang.

The objectives of these workshops were: (1) to collect the current progress of the REDD+ Readiness

activities at the sub-national level, and (2) to conduct self-assessment of the REDD+ Readiness

achievement at the sub-national level.

4.3.2.1.4 Validation Workshop

A validation workshop was aimed at proofing, correcting, validating and creating national agreement on

the self-assessment results of the REDD+ Readiness Self-Assessment for Indonesia. This was a final

workshop that invited all relevant stakeholders across Indonesia, both from the national and sub-

national levels.

Figure 0.1 shows the assessment processes that have been conducted to produce the REDD+ Readiness

Self-Assessment for Indonesia.

4.3.2.2 Facilitation of the assessment process

4.3.2.2.1 Inception Workshop

Inception Workshop was conducted following the methods from the FCPF Guideline (FCPF, 2013).

Participants have agreed to use self-assessment methods with modifications on the particular criteria and

diagnostic questions to match with Indonesia’s circumstances. A new sub-component was added within

Component 2: Sub-component 2e of Funding Instrument and Benefit Sharing Mechanism. This new sub-

component consists of the former criteria No. 21 and two new criteria developed during the workshop

(Table 0.3).

Table 4. 3 Component and sub component used in the self assessment


1. Readiness Organization and Consultation a. National REDD+ Management Arrangement

b. Consultation, Participation and Outreach


a. Assessment of Land-Use, Land-Use Change Drivers, Forest Law, Policy and Governance

b. REDD+ Strategy Options

c. Implementation Framework

d. Social and Environmental Impacts

e. Funding Instrument and Benefit Sharing Mechanism

3. Reference Emission Levels/Reference Levels –

a. National Forest Monitoring System


4. Monitoring Systems for Forests and Safeguards

b. Information System for Multiple Benefits, Other Impacts, Governance and Safeguards

Before conducting the Assessment, eight resource persons were invited to present current status of the

REDD+ implementation and lessons learned from the activities. Titles of the presentation are as follow:

1) National REDD+ Strategy: Policy, Regulation and Governance

2) Progress of FREL, NFMS and MRV to support REDD+

3) Progress in Funding Instrument and Benefit Sharing Mechanism to support REDD+

4) Progress in Safeguard Information System to support REDD+

5) Lesson learned in the consultation, public participation and REDD+ outreach processes in Kutai

Barat District

6) Lesson learned from REDD+ implementation in village level in West Kalimantan

7) Lesson learned from REDD+ implementation in District Level at Berau District

8) Lesson learned in the implementation of measurement and reporting GHG emission from the forest

based on community participation

The Assessment was then conducted in the form of Focus Group Discussion (FGD), with participants

divided into four groups according to the following topics:

9) Group 1: National REDD+ Strategy: Policy, Regulation and Governance

10) Group 2: FREL, NFMS and MRV

11) Group 3: Funding Instrument and Benefit Sharing Mechanism

12) Group 4: Safeguard Information System

Each group discussed and assessed the diagnostic questions from the relevant criteria, sub-component,

and component, as guided in the FCPF Guideline (FCPF, 2013). Evidences for each progress indicator

(color) in each diagnostic question were discussed and documented, then agreed among the participants

in each group. The results of the Assessment are in the form of progress indicators (colors), showing the

level of readiness as answers to the diagnostic questions (Figure 0.1) and followed by reasons or evidences

supporting the color.


Figure 4.1 Progress indicators.

4.3.2.2.2 Virtual Survey

A virtual survey was conducted throughout September 26th to October 16th, 2016. E-mail was used as a

survey media. Participants of the virtual survey contributed to all components, or part of these

components (specific components/sub-components), according to their expertise.

Contributions were in terms of:

a. Correction on the substances and evidences (column of evidence).

b. Correction on the assessment results (column of result).

c. Correction on the arguments of assessment results (column of result).

d. Input on additional evidence, result and argument of the assessment results.

e. Provide a note (on reasons/comments) for all corrections/comments (column of comment).

4.3.2.2.3 Sub-national Workshops

The Sub-national Workshops were conducted at provincial levels. As already mentioned in the previous

sub-sections, two provinces were selected as the sub-national representatives, namely East Kalimantan

and South Sumatra. The participants in both workshops also agreed to use the methods and the

prescribed assessment formats from the Inception Workshop, as well as applying them to the sub-national

condition.

As conducted in the Inception Workshop, resource persons were invited to present the current status of

the REDD+ implementation in each Province. The following topics were presented in each sub-national

workshop:

1) Provincial REDD+ Strategy: Policy, Regulation and Governance.

2) Progress of FREL, NFMS and MRV in East Kalimantan/South Sumatra Province.


3) Progress in Funding Instrument and Benefit Sharing Mechanism in East Kalimantan/South Sumatra

Province.

4) Progress in Safeguard Information System in East Kalimantan/South Sumatra Province.

The FGD was also conducted in each sub-national workshop, following the methods in the Inception

Workshop.

4.3.2.2.4 Validation Workshop

The validation workshop was the final workshop conducted in October 25th, 2016 in Jakarta. The aim of

the workshop was to validate the results of the REDD+ readiness self-assessment conducted at the

national level, considering the sub-national assessments and virtual surveys results. The workshop started

with an introduction from the Head of P3SEKPI, a presentation on FCPF program in Indonesia and a

presentation on the results of self-assessments: the national, sub-nationals and virtual surveys.

The FGD for validating the results of self-assessment was also conducted in the same method as that in

the Inception Workshop, where participants were divided into four groups before validations were made

by assessing the progress indicators for each diagnostic question. When the validated progress indicator

(color) was the same as the previous result, the group must provide reasons. This was also applied when

the validated progress indicator (color) changed.

4.3.3 Communicating the Assessment Outcome

4.3.3.1 Synthesis of outcomes

As described in Sub-section 4.3.2.2, based on Indonesia’s national circumstances, a new sub-component

and two new criteria were added to the R-Package: the Sub-component 2e of Funding Instrument and

Benefit Sharing Mechanism, and the Criteria No. 25 of the Funds Management Capacity and 26 of the

Availability of Funds. Therefore, the total components in the R-Package remained within four

components, with ten sub-components, 36 criteria and 59 diagnostic questions (Annex 1).

In each workshop, participants were divided into 4 groups: 1) REDD+ Strategy, 2) MRV, FREL and NFMS,

3) Safeguards, as well as 4) Funding Instrument and Benefit Sharing Mechanism. Each diagnostic question

was discussed, evidences listed, then the assessment result was given in the form of progress indicators

(colors) to each diagnostic question, after considering the availability of evidences (Figure 4.2).

In order to obtain a conclusion on the readiness of each level (diagnostic question, criteria, sub-

component and component), scores were given to each progress indicator (color). Then, to conclude the

readiness in a higher level, the average of scores from the lower level was calculated and the result was

re-assigned to the relevant progress indicator (color) based on the range of scores (Figure 0.2). These

steps were repeated until all components have been completed. The result of this analysis was presented

in the Validation Workshop.


Figure 4.2 Progress indicators, scores, and ranges

The results from the validation workshop were then processed with the same methods explained above,

and in consideration of the evidences listed in the workshops. Final assessment was made considering the

results from validation workshop and virtual surveys. A note from the virtual survey and validation

workshop results says that not all diagnostic questions were assessed (or given progress indicator), simply

because the experts in the virtual survey or participants in the validation workshop did not have the

expertise in the particular subjects of diagnostic question, or due to other reasons. In this case, it has been

assumed that the experts in the virtual survey and participants in the Validation Workshop had all agreed

with the results from the Inception Workshop. The final assessment in complete sets of self-assessment

results is presented in Annex 4.

4.3.3.2 Dissemination and validation

The dissemination process of the REDD+ Readiness Self-Assessment had been initiated through the

validation workshop, held in Jakarta on October 25th, 2016. Next, the FCPF Indonesia representative would

disseminate the assessment result through information outreach programs at the national and sub-

national levels, including the community and site levels, as well as the P3SEKPI and FCPF websites.


5 CONCLUDING REMARKS

The progress of REDD+ readiness activities in Indonesia has provided lessons learned process in from the

national and sub-national level. Major achievements found on REDD+ infrastructures, including national

and provincial policies and strategies, REL, MRV system, funding instrument, benefits sharing mechanism,

and safeguards. At the national policy and strategy, among others, Indonesia issued the REDD+ National

Strategy on 2012 as a national guidance for national REDD+ programs arrangement

and operational activities in sub-national level. Through MoEF, Indonesia has submitted National Forest

Reference Emission Level for Deforestation and Forest Degradation: In the Context of Decision 1/CP.16

para 70 UNFCCC and approved. NFMS operated by MoEF as part of the connected MRV system both in

the national and provincial levels. Indonesia has developed Safeguard Information System (SIS) as an

instrument for controlling impact on social and environmental aspects. Indonesia has also provided

options for REDD+ implementation framework on funding instrument and benefits sharing mechanism

based on existing national framework, but further development needed.

The result of the participatory self-assessment indicated that the REDD+ Readiness in Indonesia reached

81.25% (on the component level). It consists of two green, one yellow, and one orange progress

indicators. There is no red progress indicator found in the component level. Significant progress achieved

by Component 3 (Reference Emissions Levels/Reference Levels) and Component 4 (Monitoring Systems

for Forests, and Safeguards). Component 2 (REDD+ Strategy Preparation) is progressing well, but requires

further development, Component 1 (Readiness Organization and Consultation) obviously requires

further development. All efforts conducted in implementing the REDD+ activities during the Readiness

Phase both at national and sub-national levels contributed to this progress.

The achievement of REDD+ Readiness is more advanced than MTR 2014, with significant progresses such

as (the detail comparation provided in Annex 6):

- Component 1 of REDD+ Organization and Consultation indicates: (1) the change of national REDD+

management arrangement from REDD+ Agency to the DGCC under the MoEF; (2) the improvement

of consultation, participation, and outreach activities over Indonesia.

- Component 2 of REDD+ Strategy Preparation indicates: (1) 120 FMU’s have been developed

under Ministry of Forestry's authority and sub-national governments by the end of 2014, and 600

FMU’s are expected operational by 2019. FMU is a decentralized structure for forest management,

and support to the National REDD+ Strategy; (2) REDD+ National Registry developed and launched

by the MoEF in November 2016; (3) the MoEF compiled background information for SESA Final

Report development and preparation of ESMF at the end of 2016. The main finding is that more

than 400 activities related SESA found in Indonesia, and

finalizing Indonesia's SESA and ESMF analysis in 2017; (4) the General Service Agency

(Badan Layanan Umum/BLU) of Environmental Financing is under development (now, Indonesia is

on the stage of drafting the Presidential Regulation on Environmental Fund). The BLU is an agency

responsible for climate change funding instrument under the Ministry of Finance (MoFin), and

operationally under co-operation with MoEF.


- Component 3 of RELs/RLs shows that FREL has been under technical assessment by UNFCCC and

almost completed with no significant corrections.

- Component 4 of Forest Monitoring System and Safeguards shows improvements of web-based

national forest and forest carbon monitoring systems. SIS REDD+ has also been operational since

2014 under responsible of the DGCC, to develop of the data base system on data management and

information received by the SIS REDD+ management.

The REDD+ Readiness progress achievement provides evidences that the Government of Indonesia

committed to REDD+ implementation agenda. Nevertheless, there are still many works to do and

opportunities to collaborate with Indonesia, from the remaining preparation to REDD+ implementation

through finance, technology development and transfer, or capacity building. Indonesia welcomes

bilateral, regional, and international co-operation to implement the Nationally Determined Contribution;

including the REDD+ implementation as the main component from land use sector

that facilitate and expedite technology development and transfer, payment for performance, technical

co-operation, and access to financial resources to support Indonesia’s climate mitigation and adaptation

efforts towards a climate resilient future.

The challenge is the budgeting, where total budget needed for climate change-related programs during

2015-2019 reaches up to IDR 2.223 trillion (US$ 165.9 billion). Indonesian Government has allocated

budget of IDR 905.99 billion (US$ 67.6 million), which brings the need for additional budget of IDR 1.317

trillion (US$ 98.3 billion). FCPF supported REDD+ Readiness activities with around US$ 8.6 million (or

0.005% of the total budget needed), nevertheless FCPF fund contributed to fill the gaps and allocated in

the provinces considerably not too attractive for donors to participate in.

The next challenge is how to improve REDD+ instruments availability (such as FREL, MRV system, funding

instrument, benefit sharing mechanism, safeguards, etc.) in proper legal framework for its legality and

implementation legitimacy. Another challenge is on how to strengthen human resources readiness at

national and sub-national levels. Both the quality and amount of human resources are relatively limited,

while the REDD+ readiness programmes and measures are more diversed and large in scale, involving

cross-sectoral and multi stakeholders.

As a way forward, there are at least three important steps possible to do by Indonesia. First,

bringing activities with strategic impacts and high level policy process to the national scale; such as

enhancing coordination process, advancing policy on REDD+ instruments, etc.). One of the opportunities

on REDD+ readiness activities at national level is how to create synergies and to integrate REDD+ activities

in various themes. Second, directing further development and technical implementation to the selected

sub-national level like the East Kalimantan Province, selected for FCPF Carbon Fund scheme. The choice

of focus is to encourage a certain sub-national level to support national efforts and can become an

example to other sub-nationals.


REFERENCES

[BSN] Badan Standardisasi Nasional. 2011a. Standar Nasional Indonesia No. 7724:2011 Pengukuran dan

Penghitungan Cadangan Karbon – Pengukuran Lapangan untuk Penaksiran Cadangan Karbon

Hutan (Ground Based Forest Carbon Accounting). Badan Standardisasi Nasional. Jakarta.

[BSN] Badan Standardisasi Nasional. 2011b. Standar Nasional Indonesia No. 7725:2011 Penyusunan

Persamaan Allometrik untuk Penaksiran Cadangan Karbon Hutan Berdasar Pengukuran Lapangan

(Ground Based Carbon Accounting). Badan Standardisasi Nasional. Jakarta.

[BSN] Badan Standardisasi Nasional. 2013. Standar Nasional Indonesia No. 7848:2013 Penyelenggaraan

Demonstration Activity (DA) REDD+. Badan Standardisasi Nasional. Jakarta.

Center for Standardization and Environment. 2013. Principles, Criteria, and Indicators for a System for

Providing Information on REDD+ Safeguards Implementation (SIS REDD+) in Indonesia. Center for

Standardization and Environment, Ministry of Forestry, and Forest and Climate Change

Programme, Deutshce Gesellschaft fur Internationale Zusammenarbeit. Jakarta.

[DJPPI] Direktorat Jenderal Pengendalian Perubahan Iklim. 2015. Rencana Strategis Tahun 2015-2019.

Direktorat Jenderal Pengendalian Perubahan Iklim, Kementerian Lingkungan Hidup dan

Kehutanan. Jakarta.

[DJPPI] Direktorat Jenderal Pengendalian Perubahan Iklim. 2016. Kemajuan Funding Instrument dan

Benefit Sharing Mechanism di Kalimantan Timur. Presentation in the Self Assessment Sub-

National Workshop for REDD+ Readiness in East Kalimantan, Samarinda, 7th of October 2016.

Provincial Council for Climate Change of East Kalimantan Province (Dewan Daerah Perubahan

Iklim Kalimantan Timur/DDPI Kaltim): Samarinda.

[FCPF] Forest Carbon Partnership Facility. 2013. A Guide to the FCPF Readiness Assessment Framework.

Forest Carbon Partnership Facility, The World Bank. Washington DC.

[FORDA] Forestry Research and Development Agency. 2008. IFCA 2007 Consolidation Report: Reducing

Emission from Deforestation and Forest Degradation in Indonesia. Forestry Research and

Development Agency, Ministry of Forestry of the Republic of Indonesia. Jakarta.

[MoF] Ministry of Forestry. 2008. IFCA 2007 Consolidation Report: Reducing Emissions from Deforestation

and Forest Degradation in Indonesia. Forestry Research and Development Agency, the Ministry of

Forestry. Jakarta.


[UNORCID] United Nations Office for REDD+ Coordination in Indonesia (UNORCID). 2015. REDD+ Social

and Environmental Safeguards Development and Implementation in Indonesia. UNORCID.

Jakarta.

[UNREDD] United Nations Programme On Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest

Degradation. 2015. Summary of Safeguards and SIS: Indonesia. UNREDD Programme Asia Pacific.

UNDP, FAO, and UNEP.

FCCC/CP/2010/7/Add.1/C/App.I/Par.2

GIZ Forclime. 2016. Perkembangan Implementasi SIS-REDD+ di Provinsi Kalimantan Timur. Presentation

in the Self Assessment Sub-National Workshop for REDD+ Readiness in East Kalimantan,

Samarinda, 7th of October 2016.

Instruksi Presiden No. 10/2011 tentang Penundaan Pemberian Izin Baru dan Penyempurnaan Tata Kelola

Hutan Alam Primer dan Lahan Gambut.

Pambudhi, F., A. Subekti, A. Wijaya, M. Fadli, W.K. Febrina, Setiawati, Rahmina, dan D. Catur. 2015.

Pengembangan Prinsip Kriteria Indikator dan Verifier Safeguards Sosial dan Lingkungan REDD+ di

Kalimantan Timur. Kelompok Kerja REDD+ Kalimantan Timur bekerja sama dengan Lembaga

Ekolabel Indonesia (LEI), dan Conservation International Foundation. Samarinda.

Peraturan Menteri Kehutanan No. P.30/Menhut-II/2009 tentang Tata Cara Pengurangan Emisi dari

Deforestasi dan Degradasi Hutan (REDD).

Peraturan Menteri Kehutanan No. P.36/Menhut- II/2009 tentang Tata Cara Perizinan Usaha Pemanfaatan

Penyerapan dan/atau Penyimpanan Karbon pada Hutan Produksi dan Hutan Lindung.

Pokja REDD+ Kalimantan Timur. 2013. Identifikasi Kebutuhan Adaptasi Safeguard REDD+ SES di

Kalimantan Timur. Kelompok Kerja REDD+ Kalimanatan Timur bekerjasama dengan Lembaga

Ekolabel Indonesia dan Clinton Climate Initiative.

Rahmawaty, E. 2016. Kemajuan Penyiapan Arsitektur REDD+ Indonesia: Sistem Informasi (SIS) REDD+

Indonesia. Presentation for the National Seminar of REDD+ Indonesia Day “Moving REDD+

Indonesia Forward: Resolving Challenges” Serie II. Jakarta, 29th April 2016.

Situmorang, A.W., A. Nababan, A.N. Tarigan, H. Kartodihardjo, M. Safitri, P. Soeprihanto, and Sunaryo.

2015. Indeks Tata Kelola Hutan Indonesia 2014. UNDP Indonesia, 2015.

Subekti, A., Setiawan, H. Herlambang, Rahmina, A. Wijaya, W.K. Febrina, and D. Catur. 2013. Identifikasi

Kebutuhan Adaptasi Safeguard REDD+ SES di Kalimantan Timur. Kelompok Kerja REDD+


Kalimantan Timur, bekerjasama dengan Lembaga Ekolabel Indonesia, dengan dukungan

Clinton Climate Initiative. Samarinda.

Undang-Undang No. 4/2011 tentang Informasi Geospasial.

Widjaksono, A.G. 2016. Progress dalam funding instrument & benefit sharing mechanism untuk

mendukung REDD+. Direktorat Mobilisasi Sumberdaya Sektoral dan Regional Ditjen Pengendalian

Perubahan Iklim Kementerian Lingkungan Hidup & Kehutanan. Disampaikan pada Workshop

REDD+ Readiness Self-Assessment. Jakarta, 1 September 2016.

Widyaningtyas, N. 2016. Progress on Safeguards Information System (SIS-REDD+) for Implementation of

REDD+ Indonesia. REDD+ Division, Directorate of REDD+, Directorate General of Climate Change,

the Ministry of Environment and Forestry Republic of Indonesia. Presentation for REDD+

Readiness Self-Assessment Development. Jakarta, 1 September 2016.


ANNEXES

Annex 1 R-Package Assessment Framework.


Sub-component 1a. National REDD+ Management Arrangements.

Criteria Diagnostic Questions Progress indicator

1. Accountability

and

transparency.

How are national REDD+

institutions and

management

arrangements

demonstrating they are

operating in an open,

accountable and

transparent manner?

Green : There are an early stage of initiative

on establishing institution,

mechanism, planning, monitoring,

and evaluation process.

Yellow : There are an early stage of initiative




Orange : There are an early stage of initiative




Red : There are no institution, mechanism,

planning, monitoring, and evaluation

process.

2. Operating

mandate and

budget.

How is it shown that

national REDD+

institutions operate under

clear mutually supportive

mandates with adequate,

predictable and

sustainable budgets?

Green : There is a national REDD+ institution

operate under clear mutually

supportive mandates with adequate,

predictable and sustainable budgets.

Yellow : There is national REDD+ institution

operate under unclear mandates,

unclear annual budget plan,





unpredictable and unsustainable

budgets.

Orange : There are national REDD+ institutions

in the early stage of operational

activities, operating mandate and

budget have not been established.

Red : No operating mandate and budget at

all in the national REDD+ institution.

3. Multisector

coordination

mechanisms

and cross-

sector

collaboration.


institutions and

management

arrangements ensuring

REDD+ activities are

coordinated, integrated

into and influencing the

broader national or sector

policy frameworks (e.g.

agriculture, environment,

natural resources

management,

infrastructure

development and land-use

planning)?

Green : There are multisector coordination

mechanism and cross sector

collaboration.

Yellow : There are on going processes of

multisector coordination mechanism

and cross sector collaboration.

Orange : There is an early stage of initiative on

multi-stakeholder coordination and

cross sector collaboration.

Red : There are no multisector

coordination mechanism and cross

sector collaboration.

4. Technical

supervision

capacity.

How effectively and

efficiently are national

REDD+ institutions and

management

arrangements leading and

supervising multisector

readiness activities,

including the regular

supervision of technical

preparations?

Green : There are sufficient human resource

expertises, full mandate, supervision

mechanisms, and have been

experienced and implemented

technical supervision activities at

national and sub-national level.

Yellow : There are sufficient human resource


mechanisms, but have not been

implemented technical supervision

activities at national and sub-national

level.


developing human resource

expertises, full mandate, and

supervision mechanisms.





Red : There are no sufficient human

resource expertise, without mandate,

no supervision mechanism.

5. Funds

management

capacity.

How are institutions and

arrangements

demonstrating effective,

efficient and transparent

fiscal management,

including coordination

with other development

partner-funded activities?

Green : There are finance division, fund

management mechanism involving

other entities, and audited fund

management result.

Yellow : There are finance division, fund


other entities, but has not been

audited by independent auditor.


establishing finance division, fund

management mechanism, and

auditing system.

Red : There are no finance division, fund


audited fund management.

6. Feedback and

grievance

redress

mechanism.

a. What evidence is there

to demonstrate the

mechanism operating

at the national, sub-

national and local

levels, is transparent,

impartial, and has a

clearly defined

mandate, and adequate

expertise and

resources?

Green : There is relevant institution or

division for feedback and handling

complaints, and there are tools and

mechanisms available.

Yellow : There is relevant institution or


complaints, but unclear tools and

mechanisms.


establishing and developing

institution/division for feedback and

handling complaints, as well as tools

and mechanisms.

Red : There is no institution or division for

feedback and handling complaints,

tools and mechanisms are not

available.





b. What evidence is there

that potentially

impacted communities

are aware of, have

access to, and the

mechanism is

responsive to feedback

and grievances?

Green : There is a good feedback and

grievance redress to the impacted

communities.

Yellow : There are many feedback and


communities.

Orange : There is a few feedback and


communities.

Red : There is no feedback and grievance

redress.




7. Accountability

and

transparency.


institutions and

management

arrangements

demonstrating they are

operating in an open,

accountable and

transparent manner?

Green : There are an early stage of initiative




Yellow : There are an early stage of initiative




Orange : There are an early stage of initiative




Red : There are no institution, mechanism,

planning, monitoring, and evaluation

process.

8. Operating

mandate and

budget.


national REDD+

institutions operate under

clear mutually supportive

mandates with adequate,

Green : There is a national REDD+ institution

operate under clear mutually

supportive mandates with adequate,

predictable and sustainable budgets.





predictable and


Yellow : There is national REDD+ institution

operate under unclear mandates,

unclear annual budget plan,

unpredictable and unsustainable

budgets.

Orange : There are national REDD+ institutions

in the early stage of operational

activities, operating mandate and

budget have not been established.

Red : No operating mandate and budget at

all in the national REDD+ institution.

9. Multisector

coordination

mechanisms

and cross-

sector

collaboration.


institutions and

management

arrangements ensuring

REDD+ activities are

coordinated, integrated

into and influencing the

broader national or sector

policy frameworks (e.g.

agriculture, environment,

natural resources

management,

infrastructure

development and land-use

planning)?

Green : There are multisector coordination

mechanism and cross sector

collaboration.

Yellow : There are on going processes of

multisector coordination mechanism

and cross sector collaboration.


multi-stakeholder coordination and

cross sector collaboration.

Red : There are no multisector

coordination mechanism and cross

sector collaboration.

10. Technical

supervision

capacity.

How effectively and

efficiently are national

REDD+ institutions and

management

arrangements leading and

supervising multisector

readiness activities,

including the regular

supervision of technical

preparations?

Green : There are sufficient human resource


mechanisms, and have been

experienced and implemented

technical supervision activities at

national and sub-national level.

Yellow : There are sufficient human resource


mechanisms, but have not been

implemented technical supervision

activities at national and sub-national

level.


developing human resource





expertises, full mandate, and

supervision mechanisms.

Red : There are no sufficient human

resource expertise, without mandate,

no supervision mechanism.

11. Funds

management

capacity.

How are institutions and

arrangements

demonstrating effective,

efficient and transparent

fiscal management,

including coordination

with other development

partner-funded activities?

Green : There are finance division, fund


other entities, and audited fund

management result.

Yellow : There are finance division, fund


other entities, but has not been

audited by independent auditor.


establishing finance division, fund


auditing system.

Red : There are no finance division, fund


audited fund management.

12. Feedback and

grievance

redress

mechanism.

c. What evidence is there

to demonstrate the

mechanism operating

at the national, sub-

national and local

levels, is transparent,

impartial, and has a

clearly defined

mandate, and adequate

expertise and

resources?

Green : There is relevant institution or


complaints, and there are tools and

mechanisms available.

Yellow : There is relevant institution or


complaints, but unclear tools and

mechanisms.


establishing and developing

institution/division for feedback and

handling complaints, as well as tools

and mechanisms.

Red : There is no institution or division for

feedback and handling complaints,

tools and mechanisms are not

available.





d. What evidence is there

that potentially

impacted communities

are aware of, have

access to, and the

mechanism is

responsive to feedback

and grievances?

Green : There is a good feedback and


communities.

Yellow : There are many feedback and


communities.

Orange : There is a few feedback and


communities.

Red : There is no feedback and grievance

redress.


Sub-component 2a. Assessment of Land Use, Land-Use Change Drivers, Forest Law, Policy and Governance.


13. Assessment

and analysis.

Does the summary of the

work conducted during R-

PP formulation and

preparation present an

analysis of recent historical

land-use trends (including

traditional) and

assessment of relevant

land tenure and titling,

natural resource rights,

livelihoods (including

traditional/customary),

Green : There are ample analysis and

assessment on land use, land-use

change drivers, policy and

governance.

Yellow : There are fairly analysis and



governance.

Orange : There are analyses and assessment

on land use, land-use change drivers,

policy and governance but very

limited.





forest law, policy and

governance issues?

Red : There is no such analysis and



governance.

14. Prioritization

of direct and

indirect

drivers/barrier

s to forest

carbon stock

enhancement.

a. How was the analysis

used to prioritize key

direct and indirect

drivers to be addressed

by the programs and

policies included in the

REDD+ strategy?

Green : The results of analysis were mostly

used to prioritize key direct and

indirect drivers to be addressed by

the programs and policies included in

the REDD+ strategy.

Yellow : The results of analysis were fairly

used to prioritize key direct and

indirect drivers to be addressed by

the programs and policies included in

the REDD+ strategy.

Orange : The results of analysis were less used

to prioritize key direct and indirect

drivers to be addressed by the

programs and policies included in the

REDD+ strategy.

Red : The results of analysis were not used

to prioritize key direct and indirect

drivers to be addressed by the


REDD+ strategy.

b. Did the analysis

consider the major

barriers to forest

carbon stock

enhancement activities

(if appropriate) to be

addressed by the

programs and policies

included in the REDD+

strategy?

Green : The analysis mostly considered the

major barriers to forest carbon stock

enhancement activities (if

appropriate) to be addressed by the


REDD+ strategy.

Yellow : The analysis fairly considered the





REDD+ strategy.

Orange : The analysis less considered the









REDD+ strategy.

Red : The analysis did not consider the





REDD+ strategy.

15. Links between

drivers/barrier

s and REDD+

activities.

What evidences

demonstrate that

systematic links between

key drivers, and/or barriers

to forest carbon stock

enhancement activities (as

appropriate), and REDD+

activities were identified?

Green : There are identification results of

systematic links between key drivers,

and/or barriers to forest carbon

stock enhancement activities (as

appropriate), and REDD+ activities,

already integrated in the REDD+

Strategy and some of them have

been implemented.

Yellow : There are identification results of





already integrated in the REDD+

Strategy but has not been

implemented.

Orange : There are identification results of





but have still not integrated in the

REDD+ Strategy yet.

Red : Systematic links between key drivers,



appropriate), and REDD+ activities

were not identified.

16. Action plans

to address

natural

Do action plans to make

progress in the short-,

medium- and long-term

Green : There is action plans to make

progress in the short-, medium- and





resource

rights, land

tenure,

governance.

towards addressing

relevant, land-use, land


resource rights,

livelihoods, and

governance issues in

priority regions related to

specific REDD+ programs,

outline further steps and

identify required

resources?

long-term, outline further steps, and

identify required resources.

Yellow : There is action plans to make


long-term and outline further steps

but lack of identifying required

resources.

Orange : There is action plans to make


long-term, but no outline further

steps and identify required resources

Red : There is no such action plans to

make progress in the short-,

medium- and long-term.

17. Implications

for forest law

and policy.

Does the assessment

identify implications for

forest or other relevant

law and policy in the long-

term?

Green : The assessment identified


relevant law and policy in the short-,

medium- and long-term periods.

Yellow : The assessment identified


relevant law and policy in the short-

and medium-term periods only.

Orange : The assessment identified


relevant law and policy in the short-

term period only.

Red : The assessment did not identify


relevant law and policy in the long-

term.




18. Selection and

prioritization of

c. Were REDD+ strategy

options (prioritized

Green : There has been regional strategy

and regional action plans generated





REDD+ strategy

options.

based on

comprehensive

assessment of direct

and indirect drivers of

deforestation, barriers

to forest enhancement

activities and/or

informed by other

factors, as

appropriate) selected

via a transparent and

participatory process?

from a participatory and transparent

process, and recognized by all

entities.

Yellow : There has been a regional strategy

and action plan generated from

limited transparent and

participatory process, thus it has not

recognized/legitimized by a certain

entity.

Orange : There has been a regional strategy

and action plan, but generated from

a process that was not transparent

and participatory.

Red : There is no regional strategy and

action plan related to REDD+.

d. Were the expected

emissions reduction

potentials of

interventions

estimated, where

possible, and how did

they inform the design

of the REDD+ strategy?

Green : There has been estimation on

emission reduction from REDD+

policy intervention and the strategy

plan of REDD+ related to this policy

has been fully and widely informed

to the parties.

Yellow : There has been estimation on

emissions reduction from REDD+

policy interventions, and the

strategies plan of REDD+ related to

this policy has been informed to the

limited parties.

Orange : There has been estimation of

emissions reductions from REDD+

policy interventions and strategy

plans of REDD+ related to this policy

have not been communicated to the

parties.

Red : There is no estimation of emission

reductions from REDD+ policy

intervention and no information

related to the REDD+ strategy plan.





19. Feasibility

assessment.

Were REDD+ strategy

options assessed and

prioritized for their social,

environmental and

political feasibility, risks

and opportunities, and

analysis of costs and

benefits?

Green : There has been a selected of REDD+

strategy and prioritized according to

the social, economic, environmental,

and political feasibilities.

Yellow : There has been a selected of REDD+

strategy and prioritized according to

one of the eligibility criteria

including social, economic,

environmental, and political criteria.

Orange : There has been a selected REDD+

strategy but not prioritized

according to the social, economic,

environmental, and political

feasibilities.

Red : There is no or do not have the

REDD+ strategy.

20. Implications of

strategy

options on

existing

sectoral

policies.

d. Have major

inconsistencies

between the priority

REDD+ strategy

options and policies or

programs in other

sectors related to the

forest sector (e.g.

transport, agriculture)

been identified?

Green : The inconsistency of REDD+ strategy

against the existing sectoral policies

has been identified.

Yellow : Being in the advanced stages in

identifying the inconsistencies of

REDD+ strategy against the existing

sectoral policies.

Orange : Being in the early initiation stages in

identifying the inconsistencies of

REDD+ strategy against existing

sectoral policies.

Red : The inconsistency of REDD+ strategy

against the existing sectoral policies

has not been identified.

e. Is an agreed timeline

and process in place to

resolve inconsistencies

and integrate REDD+

strategy options with

relevant development

policies?

Green : There is already a timeline and

agenda about solving the

inconsistency of REDD+ strategies

against enforced policies, and has

been executed and provide

adequate results

Yellow : There is already a timeline and

agenda about solving the





inconsistency of REDD+ strategies

against enforced policies, and has

been executed but did not provide

adequate results.

Orange : There is already timeline and agenda

inconsistency problem solving

REDD+ strategies with applicable

policies, but have not been

executed.

Red : There is no timeline and agenda

about solving the inconsistency of

REDD+ strategies against the

enforced policies.

f. Are they supportive of

broader development

objectives and have

broad community

support?

Green : There are regional strategies and

action plans related to REDD+, which

have supported regional

development objectives and

received public support.

Yellow : There are regional strategies and

plans related to REDD+, which has

supported (or partially supported)

regional development goal but

never received broad public support,

or vice versa.

Orange : There is a regional strategies and

action plan related to REDD+, but it

does not support the goals of

regional development and not

supported by the wider community.

Red : There is no regional strategy and

action plan related to REDD+.





21. Adoption and

implementation

of

legislation/regula

tions.

c. Have legislation

and/or regulations

related to REDD+

programs and

activities been

adopted?

Green : All of the laws and/or regulations

related to REDD+ are currently and

have been adopted and enforced.

Yellow : Part of Laws and/or regulations

related to REDD+ are currently or

have been adopted and enforced.

Orange : In the early stages of adopting and

implementing the laws and

regulations related to REDD+.

Red : The laws and regulations related to

REDD+ have not been enforced.

d. What evidence is

there that these

relevant REDD+ laws

and policies are being

implemented?

This becomes a reference for the previous

diagnostic questions.

22. Guidelines for

implementation.

What evidence is there

that the implementation

framework has defined

carbon rights, benefit

sharing mechanisms,

REDD+ financing

modalities, procedures

for official approvals (e.g.

for pilots or REDD+

projects), and grievance

mechanisms?

Green : There is an implementation

framework which has defined the

carbon rights, benefit sharing

mechanism, REDD+ financing

modalities, approval procedure,

and complaints mechanism.

Yellow : There is an implementation

framework which has clearly

defined part of carbon rights,

benefit sharing mechanism, REDD+

financing modalities, approval

procedure, and complaints

mechanism.

Orange : There is an implementation

framework but does not clearly

defined carbon rights, benefit

sharing mechanism, REDD+

financing modalities, approval

procedure, and complaints

mechanism.





Red : There is implementation

framework as a guidance of REDD+

implementation.

23. National REDD+

registry and

system

monitoring

REDD+ activities.

Is a national geo-

referenced REDD+

information system or

registry operational has

contained

comprehensive relevant

information (e.g.

information on the

location, ownership,

carbon accounting and

financial flows for sub-

national and national

REDD+ programs and

projects), and does it

ensure public access to

REDD+ information?

Green : There is a national registry system

and monitoring system REDD+

activities that can be run at sub-

national level, and contains

comprehensive information

regarding the location, ownership,

carbon accounting, financial flows,

for REDD+ activities). Or, there is a

REDD+ system registry and

monitoring system REDD+ activities

at sub-national level that contains

comprehensive information.

Furthermore, it is guaranteeing

public access to such information.

Yellow : There is a national registry system

and monitoring system REDD+

activities that can be operated at

sub-national level, but has not

contained comprehensive

information related to the location,

ownership, carbon accounting,

financial flows, for REDD+

activities). Or, there is a REDD+

system registry and monitoring

system REDD+ activities at sub-

national level, but has not been

contained comprehensive

information.

Orange : It is on early stage of development

of national registry system and

monitoring system of REDD+

activities that can be executed at

sub-national level. Or, it is on early

stage of development of REDD+

registry system and monitoring

system REDD+ activities at sub-

national level.





Red : There is no national registry system

and monitoring system of REDD+

activities that can be implemented

in the sub-national level.

Furthermore, there is no registry

system and monitoring system of

REDD+ activities at sub-national

level.




1. Analysis of social

and

environmental

safeguard

issues.

What evidence is

there that applicable

SESA issues relevant

to the country context

have been fully

identified/analyzed via

relevant studies or

diagnostic and in

consultation process?

Green : Assessments on the safeguards

have been established by multi-

stakeholders approach.

Yellow : On going process of safeguargd

establishment and assessment

by multi-stakeholders approach.

Orange : There is the early stage of

initiative on SESA and ESMF

establishment.

Red : There is no progress.

2. REDD+ strategy design

with respect to impact.

How were SESA result

and identification of

social and

environment impacts

(both postitive and

negative) used for

prioritizing and

designing REDD+

strategy options?

Green : The result of SESA has been used

for prioritizing designing REDD+

strategy options.

Yellow : The result of SESA has not been

used for prioritizing designing

REDD+ strategy options.

Orange : There is the early stage of

process on SESA establishment.

Red : No progress et all.

3. Environmental and

social management

framework.

What evidence is

there that the ESMF is

in place and managing

environmental and

Green : ESMF has been functioned for

managing social and

environment risks.





social risk/potential

impacts related to

REDD+ activities?

Yellow : ESMF has been established, but

it has not been functioned for

managing social and

environment risks.

Orange : There is the early stage of ESMF

establishment.

Red : No progress et all.




1. Funds

management

capacity.

How are institutions

and arrangements

demonstrating

effective, efficient and

transparent fiscal

management, including

coordination with other

development partner-

funded activities?

Green : There is an institution establish

and ready to govern an

environmental financing.

Yellow : There is an advance stage of

establishing institution and

funding mechanism arrrangement

on REDD+ schema or

environmental financing.

Orange : There is an early stage of initiative

for building institution and

funding arrrangement on REDD+

schema or environmental

financing.

Red : No progress at all.

2. Availability of fund.


national and

international REDD+

institutions are

providing committed

funds for REDD+ under

clear mutually

supportive mandates

with adequate,

predictable and


Green : There are a lot of committed

funds for REDD+ in Indonesia and

have been realized in the

implementation phase.

Yellow : There are committed funds

available for REDD+ in Indonesia,

and it is ready for payment,

testing, or the early stage of

implementation.





Orange : There are committed funds for

REDD+ in Indonesia, but it is still

negosiation process.

Red : There are no commited funds for

REDD+ in Indonesia.

3. Benefit sharing

mechanism.

Transparent and

equitable existing

mechanism.

Green : There is an implemented benefit

sharing mechanism for REDD+.

Yellow : There are options for benefit

sharing mechanisms, but need to

be developed as a REDD+ benefit

sharing mechanism.

Orange : There is an early stage of initiative

on benefit sharing mechanism.

Red : There is no mechanism at all.



24. Demonstration

of methodology.

a. Is the preliminary sub-

national or national

forest REL or RL

presented (as part of

the R-Package) using a

clearly documented

methodology, based

on a step-wise

approach, as

appropriate?

Green : The methodology has been

presented and fully documented,

and is being/has been reviewed by

the relevant independent expert.

Yellow : Methodology has been presented

and fully documented but has not

been reviewed by the relevant

independent expert.

Orange : The methodology was not fully

presented and documented.

Red : The methodology was not

presented and documented.

b. Are plans for

additional steps and

data needs provided,

and is the relationship

between the sub-

national and the

Green : There are plans for additional

measures and the need for

additional data, and there is a

documentation of reference




evolving national

reference level

demonstrated (as

appropriate)?

relationship between national and

sub-national.

Yellow : In the advanced stages of plan

preparation for additional measures

and the need for additional data,

and the identification of reference

relationship between national and

sub-national.

Orange : On the early initiation stage of plan

preparation for additional measures

and the need for additional data,

and the identification of reference

relationships between national and

sub-national.

Red : There are no plans for additional

measures and the need for

additional data, the relationship

reference between national and

sub-national has not been shown.

25. Use of historical

data, and

adjusted for

national

circumstances.

a. How does the

establishment of the

REL/RL take into

account historical

data, and if adjusted

for national

circumstance, what is

the rationale and

supportive data that

demonstrate that the

proposed adjustments

are credible and

defendable?

Green : FREL is using historical data and very

complete supporting data, so that it

is credible and reliable, and is

being/has been reviewed by an

independent expert.

Yellow : FREL is using historical data and

relatively complete supporting data,

so it is quite credible and

accountable.

Orange : FREL is using historical data and

incomplete supporting data, so it is

not credible and difficult to be

justified.

Red : FREL is not using historical data and

other supporting data, so it is not

credible and cannot be justified.

b. Is sufficient data and

documentation

provided in a

transparent fashion to

allow for the

Green : There are data and documentation

for independent reconstruction and

cross-examination, which are quite

complete, including deforestation,

forest degradation, SFM,




reconstruction or

independent cross-

checking of the

REL/RL?

enhancement of forest carbon

stocks, and conservation such as

data on forest and peat fires.

Yellow : There are some data and

documentation for independent

reconstruction and cross-

examination, but incomplete.

Orange : There are some data and

documentation for independent

reconstruction and cross-

examination; however, it is

incomplete and very limited.

Red : Data and documentation are not

available for independent cross-

examination and reconstruction.

26. Technical

feasibility of the

methodological

approach, and

consistency with

UNFCCC/IPCC

guidance and

guidelines.

Is the REL/RL (presented

as part of the R-Package)

based on transparent,

complete and accurate

information, consistent

with UNFCCC guidance

and the most recent IPCC

guidance and guidelines,

and allowing for technical

assessment of the data

sets, approaches,

methods, models (if

applicable) and

assumptions used in the

construction of the

REL/RL?

Green : FREL/RL is prepared through

process that is transparent and

complete, in accordance with the

guidelines of the UNFCCC/IPCC, as

well as open for technical

assessment methodology.

Yellow : FREL/RL is prepared on a

transparent process, complete, in

accordance with the guidelines of

the UNFCCC/IPCC, but not open for

technical assessment on

methodology.

Orange : FREL/RL is prepared through a

process that is lack in transparency,

less complete, less in accordance

with the guidelines of the

UNFCCC/IPCC.

Red : FREL/RL is not prepared through a

transparent process, incomplete,

and not in accordance with the

guidelines of the UNFCCC/IPCC.


Component 4. Monitoring Systems for Forests, and Safeguards.



27. Documentation

of monitoring

approach.

d. Is there clear rationale

or analytic evidence

supporting the

selection of the used

or proposed

methodology

(combination of

remote sensing and

ground-based forest

carbon inventory

approaches, systems

resolution, coverage,

accuracy, inclusions of

carbon pools and

gases) and

improvement over

time?

Green : There is an analytic and scientific

reason in selecting the

methodology of high level forest

monitoring systems, and with

enough room for between times

improvement.

Yellow : There is an analytic and scientific


methodology for sufficient level

forest monitoring system, but not

enough room for between times

improvement.

Orange : There is an analytic and scientific


methodology of low level forest

monitoring system.

Red : There is no an analytic and scientific

reason in selecting forest

monitoring system methodology.

e. Has the system been

technically reviewed

and nationally

approved, and is it

consistent with

national and

international existing

and emerging

guidance?

Green : It has used a scheme that has been

approved and reviewed nationally,

and consistent with

national/international guidelines.

Yellow : Using a system that is in the

advanced/final stages of approval

and review processes nationally and

relatively consistent with national

guidelines/international.

Orange : Using a system that is still in the

early stages of approval and review

process nationally, and not

consistent with


Red : Not using a scheme that is

approved and reviewed nationally

and not consistent with






f. Are potential sources

of uncertainties

identified to the

extent possible?

Green : It has been identified the potential

sources of uncertainty in the

monitoring approach document.

Yellow : On the advanced/final stages on

identification potential sources of

uncertainty.

Orange : On the early initiative stages of

identification the potential sources

of uncertainty.

Red : Potential sources of uncertainty are

not identified.

28. Demonstration

of early system

implementation

e. What evidence is

there that the system

has the capacity to

monitor the specific

REDD+ activities

prioritized in the

country’s REDD+

strategy?

Green : The monitoring system already has

a high capacity and has been

completed to process the

monitoring of certain REDD+

activities from national priority.

Yellow : The monitoring system has a middle

level of capacity in monitoring

certain REDD+ activities from

national priority.

Orange : The monitoring system has very

limited capacity in monitoring

certain REDD+ activities from

national priority.

Red : The monitoring system does not

have the capacity to monitor the

certain of REDD+ activities from

national priority.

f. How does the system

identify and assess

displacement of

emissions (leakage),

and what are the early

results (if any)?

Green : The system can acurately identify

and assess emission leakage, and

there is another complementary

system supporting this information

on emission leakage.

Yellow : The system can identify and assess

the emission leakage in low levels,

and there are other complementary

systems supporting this information

on emission leakage.





Orange : System is not able to identify and

assess leakage, but there are other

alternative systems to provide

supporting information on emission

leakage.

Red : The system is not able to identify

and assess the emission leakage.

g. How are key

stakeholders involved

(participated/consult

ed) in the

development and/or

early implementation

of the system,

including data

collection and any

potential verification

of its results?

Green : There is a multi-stakeholder

involvement on the planning of

leakage anticipation at the

provincial, district, and site level.

Yellow : There is a multi-stakeholder

engagement at provincial level, and

an attempt to consolidate with the

stakeholders at district and site

level.

Orange : There is little involvement of multi-

stakeholders (at the provincial

government only).

Red : There is no multi-stakeholder

engagement.

h. What evidence is

there that the system

allows for comparison

of changes in forest

area and carbon

content (and

associated GHG

emissions) relative to

the baseline estimates

used for the REL/RL?

Green : The monitoring system can make

comparisons on forest area change,

carbon content, and GHG emissions

against baseline estimation.

Yellow : The monitoring system can make

comparisons on most aspects of

forest area change, carbon content,

and GHG emissions against the

baseline estimation.

Orange : The monitoring system can make

very limited comparisons on a few

aspects of forest area change,

carbon content, and GHG emissions

against the baseline estimation.

Red : The monitoring system cannot

provide comparisons oo forest area

change, carbon content, and GHG





emissions against the baseline

estimation.

29. Institutional

arrangements

and capacities.

d. Are mandates to

perform tasks related

to forest monitoring

clearly defined (e.g.

satellite data

processing, forest

inventory,

information sharing)?

Green : There has a clear forest monitoring

mandate and it can be run.

Yellow : There is a clear mandate on forest

monitoring, but can not be run due

to technical, coordinative, and

political reasons.

Orange : There is a forest monitoring

mandate, but it is not clear

(ambiguous, multi interpretation,

very general, etc.)

Red : There is no mandate on forest

monitoring.

e. What evidence is

there that a

transparent means of

publicly sharing forest

and emissions data

are presented and are

in at least an early

operational stage?

Green : Data of forests and emission are

open for public through certain

accessible media.

Yellow : In the advanced stages of

development system of information

transparency on forests and

emissions data for public.

Orange : There were early attempts on forest

information and emissions data

transparency to the public.

Red : There is no transparency of forest

information and emissions data to

the public.

f. Have associated

resource needs been

identified and

estimated (e.g.


training,

hardware/software,

and budget)?

Green : There is already a result of the

identification on resource

requirements for implementing

monitoring, and has already been

realized.

Yellow : There is already a result of the

identification on resource

requirements for implementing

monitoring, but has not yet

realized.





Orange : On the stage of identifying resource

requirements for monitoring

implementation.

Red : There has been no identification of

resource requirements for

implementing monitoring.


Sub-component 4b. Information System for Multiple Benefits, Other Impacts, Governance, and Safeguards.


30. Identification of

relevant non-

carbon aspect,

and social and

environmental

issues.

How have relevant non-

carbon aspect, and social

and environmental

safeguard issues of

REDD+ preparations been

identified? Are there any

capacity building

recommendations

associated with these

issues?

Green : Non-carbon aspects as well as

issues of social and environmental

safeguards framework have been

identified.

Yellow : On the advanced process of

identification non-carbon aspects as

well as issues of social and

environmental safeguards

framework.

Orange : On the early initiative identifying

non-carbon aspects and issues of

the framework of social and

environmental safeguards.

Red : Non-carbon aspects and issues of

social and environmental

safeguards framework have not

been identified.

31. Monitoring,

reporting and

information

sharing.

c. What evidence is

there that a

transparent system

for periodically

sharing consistent

information on non-

carbon aspects and

safeguards has been

presented and is in at

Green : System of sharing information has

been opened and operated.

Yellow : On the advanced process and

development of the openness of

information sharing system.

Orange : On the early stages of openness of

information sharing initiatives.





least an early

operational stage?

Red : There is no transparency in sharing

information.

d. How is the following

information being

made available: key

quantitative and

qualitative variables

about impacts on rural

livelihoods,

conservation of

biodiversity,

ecosystem services

provision, key

governance factors

directly pertinent to

REDD+ preparations,

and the

implementation of

safeguards, paying

attention to the

specific provisions

included in the ESMF?

Green : All of those informations are

available.

Yellow : Most of those informations are

available.

Orange : There is a small part of the

information available.

Red : There is no such information at all.

32. Institutional

arrangements

and capacities.

c. Are mandates to

perform tasks related

to non-carbon aspects

and safeguards clearly

defined?

Green : There are clear mandates related to

non-carbon related aspects and

safeguards, and it can be

performed.

Yellow : There are clear mandates, but can

not be performed due to technical,

coordinative, and political reasons.

Orange : There are mandates but not clear

(ambiguous, multi interpretation,

very general, etc.).

Red : No mandate related to the non-

carbon and safeguards aspects.

d. Have associated

resource needs been

identified and

estimated (e.g.


training,

Green : There is already the result of the

identification of resource

requirements for safeguards

implementation, and has already

been realized.





hardware/software,

and budget)?

Yellow : There is already a result of the

identification of resource

requirements for safeguards

implementation, but has not been

realized.

Orange : At this stage of identification of

resource requirement for

safeguards implementation

identifying resource needs.

Red : There has been no identification of

resource requirements for

safeguards implementation.


Annex 2 R-Package Assessment Results from the East Kalimantan Workshop.

Co SC Cr DQ Assessment Results from the East Kalimantan Workshop

1 1.1a 1.1a.1 1.1a.1.a ▪ Regional Council on Climate Change - East Kalimantan (RCCC) has been

established since 2011 (REDD+ Working Group included).

▪ RCCC has partnered openly to all parties.

▪ The results of RCCC - East Kalimantan are accountable.

1 1.1a 1.1a.2 1.1a.2.a ▪ East Kalimantan Governor Regulation (Pergub) No. 2/2011.

▪ There is already budget allocation from local government through local

government work units (Satuan Kerja Perangkat Daerah, SKPD) and

partners, although it is relatively inadequate.

1 1.1a 1.1a.3 1.1a.3.a ▪ REDD+ activities have been integrated into Medium Term

Development Plan-East Kalimantan.

▪ There are multisectors coordination and cross sectors collaboration

facilitated by Regional Council on Climate Change (Dewan Daerah

Perubahan Iklim, DDPI) of East Kalimantan.

1 1.1a 1.1a.4 1.1a.4.a ▪ Adequate human resources.

▪ The mandate lies on DDPI of East Kalimantan and each SKPD.

▪ Supervision mechanism lies on each SKPD.

Conclusion of the East Kalimantan

Workshop

Co SC Cr DQ

4 6 15 21

0 3 14 28

0 1 7 10

0 0 0 0


100 87.50 80.56 79.66



▪ Technical supervision lies on DDPI of East Kalimantan.

1 1.1a 1.1a.5 1.1a.5.a ▪ Management of funding that comes from the government adheres to

Government financial system.

▪ Fundings from Non-Government are accounted by DDPI of East

Kalimantan according to the donors' financial system.

▪ Budget management is audited.

1 1.1a 1.1a.6 1.1a.6.a ▪ There is an information disclosure system in activities management at

SKPD including the handling of the public complaints.

▪ Public complaints have been managed through mentoring by DDPI of

East Kalimantan work partners.

▪ Instruments and mechanism (SOP) still need to be developed and

transparent to other parties.

1 1.1a 1.1a.6 1.1a.6.b ▪ The parties may submit a complaint to the related agency/institution.

▪ The number of complaints can not be in quantification.

▪ The handling is still ad hoc (established in the relevant institutions,

when the problem arises).

1 1.1b 1.1b.7 1.1b.7.a Each meeting was held by inviting the parties, but not on all occasions all

of the invited parties can attend the meeting.

1 1.1b 1.1b.7 1.1b.7.b Every meeting in the village, district, or provincial level invites

representatives of all parties including local/indigeneous community.

1 1.1b 1.1b.8 1.1b.8.a The public consultation process uses a language understood by the

participants and invites all parties.

1 1.1b 1.1b.8 1.1b.8.b The consultation process has been attended by the parties and with no

discrimination.

1 1.1b 1.1b.8 1.1b.8.c Communities were involved in the decision-making process.

1 1.1b 1.1b.8 1.1b.8.d The consultation process has involved all gender.

1 1.1b 1.1b.9 1.1b.9.a Management has been built, including providing information to all parties.

1 1.1b 1.1b.9 1.1b.9.b There are areas that are not easily accessed in relation to the access of

communication and information.

1 1.1b 1.1b.9 1.1b.9.c Through village leaders, or the involvement of social development officer.



1 1.1b 1.1b.10 1.1b.10.a Informations gathered from public consultation are delivered back to the

participants, through electronic media and printed documents.

2 2.2a 2.2a.11 2.2a.11.a There has been already analysis and assessment of land use, land-use

change drivers, policy and governance system which is quite complete,

and has received formal approval from the sub-national authorities, as

well as recognized by the parties.

2 2.2a 2.2a.12 2.2a.12.a All of the results of analysis and assessments have been used to set up

priorities.

2 2.2a 2.2a.12 2.2a.12.b The results of the analysis and assessment have considered all of the main

obstacles on the forest carbon stocks enhancement for the

activities/programs/strategies of REDD+.

2 2.2a 2.2a.13 2.2a.13.a The result of systematic relationship identification on the causes/barriers

of forest carbon stocks enhancement with REDD+ activities, has been

already integrated into the regional strategy and plan of action of REDD+,

and has been executed.

2 2.2a 2.2a.14 2.2a.14.a There has been a Regional Strategy and Action Plan of REDD+, and already

handled some issues about rights on natural resources, land tenure and

forest governance.

2 2.2a 2.2a.15 2.2a.15.a The analysis and assessment have identified its implications on the forest

and medium term policies only.

2 2.2b 2.2b.16 2.2b.16.a There is a regional strategy and action plan, which is originated from a

participatory and transparent process, and recognized and implemented

by all entities.

2 2.2b 2.2b.16 2.2b.16.b There has been estimation on emission reduction contained in Regional

Medium-term Development Plan (Rencana Pembangunan Jangka

Menengah Daerah, RPJMD) and fully notified to the parties.

2 2.2b 2.2b.17 2.2b.17.a There is already a priority, but has yet to consider the social aspects.

2 2.2b 2.2b.18 2.2b.18.a The inconsistency has been identified.

2 2.2b 2.2b.18 2.2b.18.b The timeline has already existed; the problem-solving agenda has been

executed but did not provide adequate results.

2 2.2b 2.2b.18 2.2b.18.c There is regional strategies and action plan related to REDD+, which has

supported the regional development goal but have not received widely by

the community. Therefore, the Green Growth Compact has been

established and declared in May 2016.

2 2.2c 2.2c.19 2.2c.19.a All of the laws and/or regulations related to REDD+ is being/has been

adopted and executed/implemented by East Kalimantan Province.



2 2.2c 2.2c.19 2.2c.19.b ▪ All of national programs, laws related to REDD+ have been

implemented in East Kalimantan.

▪ Evidence: There are no activities which contradict to national policy.

2 2.2c 2.2c.20 2.2c.20.a ▪ There is already implementation framework of REDD+ in the form of

Provincial Strategy and Action Plan (Strategi dan Rencana Aksi Provinsi,

SRAP) of REDD+.

▪ There is already early initiation for FCPF Carbon Fund.

▪ The development of REDD+ financing modalities, official approval

procedure, and complaints mechanism are required.

2 2.2c 2.2c.21 2.2c.21.a There have been discussions related to the development of a national

registry and monitoring systems of REDD+ activities, but have not been

institutionalized, so it is still at an early stage.

2 2.2d 2.2d.22 2.2d.22.a ▪ Not only SESA, other safeguards systems are also used.

▪ It has been widely discussed and adopted locally.

▪ Many partial evaluations have been done but have not been compiled

comprehensively.

▪ Instruments such as HCV have been performed but the information

system has not been compiled.

2 2.2d 2.2d.23 2.2d.23.a It has been designed and organized for ERPD document compliance by

considering 7 elements of safeguards.

2 2.2d 2.2d.24 2.2d.24.a ▪ There is already improvement on work plans/tools.

▪ There has been Regional Regulation (Peraturan Daerah, PERDA)

related to customary communities (recognition of customary

community in some districts).

▪ It has been used but not maximum.

▪ There are already environment instruments (HCV, AMDAL, RKL, RPL,

and Certification).

▪ There has been safeguards simplification, even translated into some

local languages (3 largest local tribes in East Kalimantan).

▪ There has been mechanism for objections submission in several

institutions (even with national instruments).

▪ Information system needs to be improved.

▪ Public involvement need to be improved.



▪ FPIC is not fully implemented.

2 2.2e 2.2e.25 2.2e.25.a Fund management institutions have been established but have not had a

complete setup.

2 2.2e 2.2e.26 2.2e.26.a Funding is available for East Kalimantan through the International

Cooperation Institutes and the Non-Government Organizations, for

example: GIZ, TNC, WWF, GGGI, TFCA, MCAI, TAF.

2 2.2e 2.2e.27 2.2e.27.a There has been already a mechanism established on some of undertaken

projects, for example: in Berau.

3 3.3a 3.3a.28 3.3a.28.a The methodology has been presented and fully documented but has not

been reviewed by the relevant independent expert.

3 3.3a 3.3a.28 3.3a.28.b There are plans for additional measures and the need for additional data,

and there is a documentation of reference relationship between national

and sub-national as well.

3 3.3a 3.3a.29 3.3a.29.a FREL is using historical data and very complete supporting data, so that it

is credible and reliable, but it has not been reviewed by an independent

expert.

3 3.3a 3.3a.29 3.3a.29.b Data and documentation of forest and peat fires are not yet available.

3 3.3a 3.3a.30 3.3a.30.a FREL/RL is prepared through a process that is transparent, complete, in

accordance with the guidelines of the UNFCCC/IPCC, as well open for

technical assessment on methodology and reproducible (trace back).

4 4.4a 4.4a.31 4.4a.31.a There is an analytic and scientific reason in selecting the methodology of

high level forest monitoring system, and still have enough room for

between times improvement.

4 4.4a 4.4a.31 4.4a.31.b Already using a system that is approved and reviewed nationally and

consistent with national/international guidelines.

4 4.4a 4.4a.31 4.4a.31.c It has been identified the potential sources of uncertainty in the

monitoring approach document.



4 4.4a 4.4a.32 4.4a.32.a The monitoring system has middle level capacity in monitoring certain

REDD+ activities from national priority.

4 4.4a 4.4a.32 4.4a.32.b The system cannot identify and assess the emission leakage, but there are

other alternative systems that can provide supporting information on

emission leakage.

4 4.4a 4.4a.32 4.4a.32.c There is a multi-stakeholder engagement at provincial level, and an

attempt to consolidate with the stakeholders at the district and site level.

4 4.4a 4.4a.32 4.4a.32.d The monitoring system can make comparisons on most aspects of forest

area change, carbon content, and GHG emissions against the baseline

estimation.

4 4.4a 4.4a.33 4.4a.33.a There is a clear mandate on forest monitoring, but can not be run due to

technical, coordinative, and political reasons.

4 4.4a 4.4a.33 4.4a.33.b There were early attempts on forest information and emissions data

transparency to the public.

4 4.4a 4.4a.33 4.4a.33.c There is already a result of the identification on resource requirements for

monitoring, but have not been realized.

4 4.4b 4.4b.34 4.4b.34.a ▪ There is already a document containing important issues about East

Kalimantan in order to complete the criteria and indicators.

▪ There is already a document adapting CI safeguards into local context.

▪ There is already a language simplification point in the implementation

criteria of safeguards.

▪ Trial and error tests have been conducted in several districts.

▪ GAP analysis has been performed.

4 4.4b 4.4b.35 4.4b.35.a ▪ There is already a WEB based at the national level.

▪ Socialization and discussion about the alignment of the existing

safeguards have been done.

▪ There is data management analysis at sub-national level (at province).

▪ There is no data management institution (PPID is established but its

functions are not yet maximized). It has been hoped that Information

and Documentation Management Office (Pejabat Pengelola Infromasi

dan Dokumentasi, PPID) to be maximized when the duties and

incentives including supporting data on each SKPD are available.

▪ Data protocol needs to be built (who can input and has access on it).



4 4.4b 4.4b.35 4.4b.35.b ▪ Most of the data are available but have yet to be properly compiled

(for example biodiversity data which are dispersed over several

agencies), it needs a good mechanism.

▪ There are already profiles of Provincial and District biodiversity (Paser

District).

▪ Data about socio-economic and impact on livelihood are not up-to-

date even though these yearly data are available in Central Bureau of

Statistics (Badan Pusat Statistik, BPS).

▪ Encouraging One Map and One Data, including biodiversity and socio-

economic data.

4 4.4b 4.4b.36 4.4b.36.a ▪ Encouraging the establishing of permanent institutions in the province.

▪ There are human resources even though their capacity must be

improved.

▪ The infrastructure already exists but not adequate.

▪ There are working groups but do not have clear authority.

▪ The mandates should be clarified.

4 4.4b 4.4b.36 4.4b.36.b ▪ Some training has been done, for example LUMEN, but not yet acted

upon.

▪ Hardware web-based system has been developed at the national level

and has been discussed in the subprovince level.

▪ There is database software that can integrate safeguards data.

▪ There is no capacity identification yet.



Annex 3 R-Package Assessment Results from the South Sumatra Workshop.

Co SC Cr DQ Assessment Results from the South Sumatra Workshop

1 1.1a 1.1a.1 1.1a.1.a ▪ Can South Sumatra REDD+ Working Group (WG) (ad hoc) already be said as REDD+ Institution at sub-national level? How

does Climate Change Unit position when not yet carry out openly?

▪ Conclusion: Not yet sufficiently open, accountable and transparent.

1 1.1a 1.1a.2 1.1a.2.a REDD+ activities in South Sumatra are financially dependent, still partial and fragmented depending on the donors and un-

coordinated with REDD+ Working Group.

1 1.1a 1.1a.3 1.1a.3.a Currently, the institution in charge of REDD+ activities in South Sumatra is still in transition from REDD+ WG that has no

longer active to Climate Change Office (Balai PPI).

1 1.1a 1.1a.4 1.1a.4.a It cannot be explained in detail since the transition from REDD+ WG to Climate Change Office (Balai PPI) is still in progress.

1 1.1a 1.1a.5 1.1a.5.a Because the REDD+ Working Group of South Sumatra does not have Finance Division that can be verified.

1 1.1a 1.1a.6 1.1a.6.a

1 1.1a 1.1a.6 1.1a.6.b

1 1.1b 1.1b.7 1.1b.7.a NGO and private sector through various programs have involved a wide range of community groups and other stakeholders.

1 1.1b 1.1b.7 1.1b.7.b Participation of community through various projects has been carried out but the Government roles merely bridging the

community with project parties.

1 1.1b 1.1b.8 1.1b.8.a The lack of information shared by members of the group (consultation with Bappeda (Regional Development Planning

Agency) and Dinas Kehutanan (Forestry Office) is necessary).

Conclusion of the South Sumatra

Workshop

Co SC Cr DQ

2 4 10 13

1 4 12 28

1 2 12 15

0 0 2 3


81.25 80.00 70.83 71.61



1 1.1b 1.1b.8 1.1b.8.b Public consultations have involved various stakeholders, but not all relevant stakeholders are involved.

1 1.1b 1.1b.8 1.1b.8.c In some cases, local community institutions were involved in determining the location and type of activities.

1 1.1b 1.1b.8 1.1b.8.d The consultation process has begun accommodating the arising issues at the site level.

1 1.1b 1.1b.9 1.1b.9.a Some information has been known and shared.

1 1.1b 1.1b.9 1.1b.9.b Information is presented in a document form that can be accessed by stakeholders.

1 1.1b 1.1b.9 1.1b.9.c Document in the form of report and the dissemination have been undertaken.

1 1.1b 1.1b.10 1.1b.10.

a

The results of existing research and studies report have not been utilized.

2 2.2a 2.2a.11 2.2a.11.

a

Analysis of land use has been used but land conflicts still occurred.

2 2.2a 2.2a.12 2.2a.12.

a

All of program determination used bottleneck analysis.

2 2.2a 2.2a.12 2.2a.12.

b

All of program determination used obstacle analysis.

2 2.2a 2.2a.13 2.2a.13.

a

Some programs have been implemented and there were some obstacle factors.

2 2.2a 2.2a.14 2.2a.14.

a

▪ It has been mostly included in the document collated by the REDD+ WG.

▪ It has not been implemented due to all technical and financial constraints (rules, no funding priorities).

2 2.2a 2.2a.15 2.2a.15.

a

Medium-term has been included (RPJMD). Not all of the long term.

2 2.2b 2.2b.16 2.2b.16.

a

There has been already a regional strategy and action plan involving various institutions and community (participative).

2 2.2b 2.2b.16 2.2b.16.

b

There has been estimation on emissions reductions from REDD+ policy interventions which has been informed limitedly, not

comprehensive.

2 2.2b 2.2b.17 2.2b.17.

a

There has been REDD+ strategy and prioritized by taking into account the social, economic, environmental and political

feasibilities.

2 2.2b 2.2b.18 2.2b.18.

a

There are advanced stages of identification of incosistency REDD+ strategy against policy.

2 2.2b 2.2b.18 2.2b.18.

b

There have been already a timeline and agenda about solving the problems but did not provide adequate results.

2 2.2b 2.2b.18 2.2b.18.

c

There is a regional strategy and action plan related to REDD+ which has supported the regional development goal and

received support from the wider community.



2 2.2c 2.2c.19 2.2c.19.

a

All of the laws and regulations related to REDD+ are in the prosess of adoption and implementation or has been adopted

and implemented.

2 2.2c 2.2c.19 2.2c.19.

b

2 2.2c 2.2c.20 2.2c.20.

a

The implementation framework has defined the carbon right and clearly regulated part of the carbon right, its distribution,

benefits, etc.

2 2.2c 2.2c.21 2.2c.21.

a

National geo-referenced system has been already established and newly introduced (on the early stages of introduction).

2 2.2d 2.2d.22 2.2d.22.

a

▪ SIS-REDD+ has been initiated by MRPP. But it has not been developed yet.

▪ Community Development, Development of Village Nursery, and Community Fire Concerned Group have been

established. But it has not been developed yet.

2 2.2d 2.2d.23 2.2d.23.

a

▪ Strategic action plan has been included in REDD+ SRAP (Provincial Strategic Action Plan) document.

▪ It has been included in social forest schemes (community forest, village forest).

▪ It has been included in work plans of SKPD (local government work unit) of Dinas Kehutanan (Forestry Office).

2 2.2d 2.2d.24 2.2d.24.

a

DGCC has been developing regulations on SIS-REDD+ Indonesia.

2 2.2e 2.2e.25 2.2e.25.

a

Some institutions have individually and collaboratively initiated to rise funding.

2 2.2e 2.2e.26 2.2e.26.

a

There are potential donors that are ready to carry out activities in South Sumatra (need clarification from Bappeda and

relevant agencies).

2 2.2e 2.2e.27 2.2e.27.

a

Provincial Bappeda has submitted several mechanism options.

3 3.3a 3.3a.28 3.3a.28.

a

▪ Majority events are second tier. Activities should be undertaken to reach the third tier.

▪ The methodology has been used and awaiting the review from the independent experts.

3 3.3a 3.3a.28 3.3a.28.

b

▪ The additional data is needed especially data about land cover types that have not been measured, for example, coffee,

mangrove, rubber, palm oil, primary forest, secondary forest, shrub.

▪ Conditions of burnt forest types.

▪ It is still in initiation stage.

▪ The changes in the commitment on national emission reduction need to be scaled down to provincial level (26% to

29%).

3 3.3a 3.3a.29 3.3a.29.

a

It has been used complete data and field measurement data but has not been reviewed by independent experts.



3 3.3a 3.3a.29 3.3a.29.

b

▪ It can be verified based on the coordinate data of each PSP point.

▪ Complete documentation including data, photos, etc.

▪ Emissions generated from the fire have not been fully calculated (still in the process of calculation).

▪ Data are complete but still spread over various parties, both government and NGOs that are involved in forestry.

▪ It needs a synergy among the various parties.

3 3.3a 3.3a.30 3.3a.30.

a

▪ It has been using IPCCC 2006 guidelines.

▪ There are still shortages scattered in various institutions.

▪ Methodology is open for public review and the used methods have been informed to public through

seminars/workshops.

4 4.4a 4.4a.31 4.4a.31.

a

▪ All carbon pools have been measured.

▪ Database is complete but still scattered over various parties.

▪ Not enough space for between times measurement (financial constraints).

▪ Insufficient number of PUP at each land cover.

4 4.4a 4.4a.31 4.4a.31.

b

▪ It has been consistent with the SNI guidelines.

▪ SNI has been reviewed nationally.

4 4.4a 4.4a.31 4.4a.31.

c

The method has been considering the uncertainty, for example the location access.

4 4.4a 4.4a.32 4.4a.32.

a

▪ The updated data have not been available quickly and accurately.

▪ The result of land cover has not been fast and on time.

4 4.4a 4.4a.32 4.4a.32.

b

The system is able to identify emission leakage.

4 4.4a 4.4a.32 4.4a.32.

c

▪ Have involved various stakeholders.

▪ It is still in initiation stage.

4 4.4a 4.4a.32 4.4a.32.

d

The monitoring system used has been largely utilized to monitor on forests area changes, carbon and emissions.

4 4.4a 4.4a.33 4.4a.33.

a

There are already primary duties and functions (Tugas Pokok dan Fungsi, Tupoksi) in each institution.

4 4.4a 4.4a.33 4.4a.33.

b

Website has been completed but need to be updated quickly and accurately.



4 4.4a 4.4a.33 4.4a.33.

c

It has been identified and expected but not yet realized.

4 4.4b 4.4b.34 4.4b.34.

a

Aspects of environmental services and NTFPs have been included in the working plan of SKPD and Forest Management Unit

(Kesatuan Pengelolaan Hutan, KPH). And the identification process still continues.

4 4.4b 4.4b.35 4.4b.35.

a

PEP (Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting) mechanism has been built.

4 4.4b 4.4b.35 4.4b.35.

b

▪ At the time of MRPP project implementation has been developed the livelihoods of community through various

assistance.

▪ In some village, empowerment effort has been followed by GIZ in BIOCLIM project.

▪ But in some villages such efforts are not sustainable.

4 4.4b 4.4b.36 4.4b.36.

a

Climate Change Office (Balai PPI) has been established with one of the primary tasks and functions to facilitate the

safeguards implementation.

4 4.4b 4.4b.36 4.4b.36.

b

Climate Change Office (Balai PPI) is still preparing resource requirements in the work plans (Rencana Kerja, Renja) of

Climate Change Office (Balai PPI).



Annex 4 R-Package Final Assessment Results.

C

o SC Cr DQ Assessment Results from the Final Assessment Workshop

1 1.1

a

1.1a.1 1.1a.1.a Directorate General of Climate Change (DGCC) has been established under the

Ministry of Environment and Forestry. The institutional mechanisms, planning,

monitoring, and evaluation mechanisms also has been developed since 2014.

Website is available, but need revision on the contents. Registry system

(monitoring and evaluation) related with accountability is still on progress.

Reliable system has not yet developed.

Note:


1 1.1

a

1.1a.2 1.1a.2.a There is a DGCC as a national REDD+ institutions operating under clear mutually

supportive mandates with adequate, predictable and sustainable budgets from

National Budget and Expenditure System (Anggaran Pendapatan dan Belanja

Negara, APBN).

Notes:

Presidential Regulation No. 16/2015 concerning the Ministry of Environment and

Forestry. Available at

http://ditjenppi.menlhk.go.id/reddplus/images/resources/peraturan/Perpres_16

_Tahun_2015-KLHK.pdf

1 1.1

a

1.1a.3 1.1a.3.a DGCC is the national institution on dealing with climate change, including REDD+

activities. Since 2014, DGCC has been conducting coordination activities,

integrations into and influencing the broader national or sector policy

frameworks (e.g. agriculture, natural resources management, infrastructure

development and land-use planning). However, it is still lack of coordination

between institutions.

Conclusion of the Final

Assessment Workshop

Co SC Cr DQ

2 4 11 16

1 4 18 31

1 2 7 11

0 0 0 1

Percentage of a+ Readiness

81.25 80 77.78 76.27


C


Note:


1 1.1

a

1.1a.4 1.1a.4.a DGCC has a sufficient human resource, full mandate for take a lead, and the

supervision mechanism is available. However, technical capacity buildings are

still needed.

Note:

http://ditjenppi.menlhk.go.id/program

1 1.1

a

1.1a.5 1.1a.5.a DGCC has a good capacity to manage the funds. There is a finance division within

DGCC. However, there is no system for independent auditing yet.

Notes:

- http://ditjenppi.menlhk.go.id/program

- http://www.menlhk.go.id/

1 1.1

a

1.1a.6 1.1a.6.a There is an early stage of initiative on establishing and developing

institution/division for feedback and handling complaints, as well as tools and

mechanisms, throughout the country, but there is already a division in the

Ministry of Forestry dealing with feedback and grievance, especially related with

forest and land fire, land conflict, etc.

Notes:

- Link for complaint on hot spot and forest fire: http://sipongi.dephut.go.id/

- Link for complains on land tenure conflixt:

http://pskl.menlhk.go.id/pktha/pengaduan/frontend/web/index.php?r=site%

2Ftatacara

1 1.1

a

1.1a.6 1.1a.6.b There is a few feedbacks and grievance redress to the impacted communities.

1 1.1

b

1.1b.7 1.1b.7.a There is participation from multi-stakeholders, with less participation and less

escalation.

1 1.1

b

1.1b.7 1.1b.7.

b

There is early stage initiative to build participative mechanism. There are several

initiatives, but still operational in the local level.

1 1.1

b

1.1b.8 1.1b.8.a There is early stage initiative to build a consultation process in national and local

level. FCPF guideline for conducting public consultation is available.

Note:

REDD+ National Strategy, issued by REDD+ Task Force on 2012. Available at

www.satgasreddplus.org


C


1 1.1

b

1.1b.8 1.1b.8.

b

There is early initiative to build a self-selection process. Some self-assessment

selections processes are also exist, but limited in number.

Note:

- The Minister of Forestry Regulation (Peraturan Menteri Kehutanan) No.

P.30/Menhut-II/200930 /Menhut-II/20092009 concerning the Procedure for

REDD (Tata Cara Pengurangan Emisi dari Deforestasi dan Degradasi Hutan

(REDD).

- The Minister o Foretry Regulation No. P.36/Menhut-II/2009 concerning the

Procedure of Carbon Sink and Removal Bussiness Permit in the Protection

and Production Forests.

1 1.1

b

1.1b.8 1.1b.8.c There is early initiative to facilitate engagement indigenous people institution.

1 1.1

b

1.1b.8 1.1b.8.

d

Gender issues mainstreaming has been initiated, gender sensitive and inclusive

consultation processes available, but still in limited cases.

1 1.1

b

1.1b.9 1.1b.9.a There is a transparent, consistent and timely sharing and disclosure of

information (related to all readiness activities, including the development of

REDD+ strategy, reference levels, and monitoring systems), but has not covered

all levels of entities.

1 1.1

b

1.1b.9 1.1b.9.

b

Little information can be accessed by stakeholders in some of regions in

Indonesia.

1 1.1

b

1.1b.9 1.1b.9.c There are quite channels of communications have been used to ensure that

stakeholders are well informed, but less coverage to those that have limited or

no access to relevant information.

Notes:

Web based such as: http://ditjenppi.menlhk.go.id/; www.satgasreddplus.org;

Indonesia also used the structural mechanism through REDD+ Task Force at

national and sub-national (provincials and districts) levels.

1 1.1

b

1.1b.1

0

1.1b.10

.a

There are quite outcomes of consultations integrated in management

arrangements, strategy development and technical activities related to RL and

monitoring information system development.

2 2.2

a

2.2a.1

1

2.2a.11.

a

There are ample analysis and assessment on land use, land-use change drivers,

policy and governance.

Note:

Submission by Indonesia, National FREL for Deforestation and Forest

Degradation. Available at http://ditjenppi.menlhk.go.id/pustaka-djppi

2 2.2

a

2.2a.1

2

2.2a.12.

a

The results of analysis were mostly used to prioritize key direct and indirect

drivers to be addressed by the programs and policies included in the REDD+

strategy.

Note:


C




2 2.2

a

2.2a.1

2

2.2a.12.

b

The analysis mostly considered the major barriers to forest carbon stock

enhancement activities (if appropriate) to be addressed by the programs and

policies included in the REDD+ strategy.

2 2.2

a

2.2a.1

3

2.2a.13.

a

There are identification results of systematic links between key drivers, and/or

barriers to forest carbon stock enhancement activities (as appropriate), and

REDD+ activities, already integrated in the REDD+ Strategy and some of them

have been implemented.

2 2.2

a

2.2a.1

4

2.2a.14.

a

There are action plans to make progress in the short-, medium- and long-term,

outline further steps and identifies required resources. Not all strategies in sub-

national level are available, but for the national level, National Strategy for

REDD+ is available.

Note:



2 2.2

a

2.2a.1

5

2.2a.15.

a

The assessment identified implications for forest or other relevant law and policy

in the short- and medium-term periods only.

2 2.2

b

2.2b.1

6

2.2b.16

.a

REDD+ strategy options selected via a transparent and participatory processes.

Note:



2 2.2

b

2.2b.1

6

2.2b.16

.b

The expected emissions reduction potentials of interventions were not directly

estimated because it was difficult to assess, and the design of the REDD+

strategy was informed to the public via public consultations, and various media

in limited manner.

2 2.2

b

2.2b.1

7

2.2b.17

.a

The REDD+ strategy options have not yet fully supported by the local politics.

2 2.2

b

2.2b.1

8

2.2b.18

.a

There were minor inconsistencies between the priority REDD+ strategy options

and policies or programs in other sectors related to the forest sector (e.g.

transport, agriculture) have been identified.

2 2.2

b

2.2b.1

8

2.2b.18

.b

There is early initiative upon agreed timeline and process in place to resolve

inconsistencies and integrate REDD+ strategy options with relevant development

policies, but not operational.


C


2 2.2

b

2.2b.1

8

2.2b.18

.c

The REDD+ Strategy has been fairly supportive of broader development

objectives, but not yet supported by broad community.

Note:



2 2.2

c

2.2c.1

9

2.2c.19.

a

Some of legislation and/or regulations related to REDD+ programs and activities

have been adopted and implemented, for example: moratorium of new license

in primary forest and peat land for improving forest governance, and One Map

Policy. Some others are on-going process.

Notes:

- Presidential Instruction No. 10/2011 concerning Moratorium of the New

Licences and Improving Forest Governance of Primary Forest and Peatland.

- Act No 4/2011 concerning Geospatial Information.

2 2.2

c

2.2c.1

9

2.2c.19.

b

Some evidences are moratorium of new license in primary forest and peat land

for improving forest governance, and One Map Policy, licenses on ecosystem

restoration, and licenses on carbon stocking and sequestration.

Note:

- Presidential Instruction No. 10/2011 concerning Moratorium of the New

Licences and Improving Forest Governance of Primary Forest and Peatland.


2 2.2

c

2.2c.2

0

2.2c.20.

a

The infrastructure mechanism for implementation framework has been

developed and almost finished (e.g. defines carbon rights, benefit sharing

mechanisms, REDD+ financing modalities, procedures for official approvals (e.g.

for pilots or REDD+ projects), and grievance mechanisms).

Note:

- The Minister of Forestry Regulation (Peraturan Menteri Kehutanan) No.

P.30/Menhut-II/200930 /Menhut-II/20092009 concerning the procedure for

REDD (Tata Cara Pengurangan Emisi dari Deforestasi dan Degradasi Hutan

(REDD).

- The Minister of Forestry Regulation No. P.36/Menhut-II/2009 concerning the

Procedure of Carbon Sinc and Removal Bussiness Permits in the Protection and

Production Forests.

2 2.2

c

2.2c.2

1

2.2c.21.

a

The REDD+ information system or registry has been developed, but not yet

launched or operational.

Note:

http://bpredd.reddplusid.org/pustaka/dokumen/dokumen-satgas-redd

2 2.2

d

2.2d.2

2

2.2d.22

.a

National Forestry Council (Dewan Kehutanan Nasional, DKN) representing multi-

stakeholders on forestry sector has been facilitating SESA & ESMF development.

Consultation processes are on-going and involving national and sub-national

entities. However, the World Bank does not satisfy yet with the progress.

Other mechanism, such as KLHS, EIA, HCVF are available and functioning as

complementary to SESA.


C


Note:

Indonesia has established the Safeguards Information System (SIS). Available at:


2 2.2

d

2.2d.2

3

2.2d.23

.a

Establishment of SESA was conducted in the same time with the REDD+ National

Strategy. Hence, the REDD+ National Strategy has not been accomodated the

lesson learns from SESA.

Note:



2 2.2

d

2.2d.2

4

2.2d.24

.a

Conceptual framework of ESMF is not established yet.

Note:



2 2.2

e

2.2e.2

5

2.2e.25.

a

The concept of funding mechanism arrangement has been developed, and now it

is on going process to be legalized by Government Regulation. Funding

mechanism will be in the form of Public Service Agency (Badan Layanan Umum)

of Environmental Financing.

Note:

Government Regulation Bill on the Environment Economics Instrument is Act No.

23/2009 concerning Protection and Environment Management.

2 2.2

e

2.2e.2

6

2.2e.26.

a

There are funding mechanisms committed for REDD+ payment in Indonesia, e.g.

through billateral agreements, joint creditting mechanism, national budget, and

others.

2 2.2

e

2.2e.2

7

2.2e.27.

a

There are options of benefit sharing mechanism in Indonesia, among others:

fiscal transfer, Specific Allocation Funds (Dana Aloksi Khusus/DAK), General

Allocation Funds (Dana Alokasi Umum/DAU), National Community

Empowerment Program (Program Nasional Pemberdayaan Masyarakat, PNPM),

etc. These mechanisms need to be developed and adjusted for REDD+ benefit

sharing mechanism.

Notes:

- Minister of Forestry Regulation No. 30/2009 concerning the Procedures of

Reducing Emission from Deforestation and Forest Degradation - REDD+.

- Presidential Regulation No. 80/2011 on Trust Fund.

3 3.3

a

3.3a.2

8

3.3a.28.

a

Significant progress. FREL has been under technical assessment by UNFCCC and

almost completed with no significant correction, land use data and peat land

need to be synchronize.

Note:

MoEF. 2015. National Forest Reference Emission Level for Deforestation and

Forest Degradation: In the Context of Decision 1/CP.16 para 70 UNFCCC

(Encourages developing country Parties to contribute to mitigation actions in the


C


forest sector), published by DGCC of MoEF Indonesia. Available at


3 3.3

a

3.3a.2

8

3.3a.28.

b

Yes, additional steps and data have been provided. But the relationship between

the sub-national and national RL is in the process of development.

3 3.3

a

3.3a.2

9

3.3a.29.

a

Yes, the FREL is credible and defendable (through TA FREL by UNFCCC).

Note:






3 3.3

a

3.3a.2

9

3.3a.29.

b

The data and documentation of deforestation and forest degradation have been

completed, but data and information of forest and peat fire need to be verified.

Note:

Indonesia’s forest monitoring system is known as SIMONTANA (Sistem

Monitoring Hutan Nasional). Available online at http://nfms.dephut.go.id/ipsdh/,

coupled with the WebGIS at http://webgis.dephut.go.id/ for display and viewing.

3 3.3

a

3.3a.3

0

3.3a.30.

a

Yes. The development of FREL is using IPCC 2006 Guidelines and IPCC 2013

Wetlands Supplement. FREL Indonesia was already undergone TA FREL by

UNFCCC.

Note:






4 4.4

a

4.4a.3

1

4.4a.31.

a

Activity data has been under development of adjustment interpretation from

manual to automatic.

Note:

Indonesia’s NFMS is available online at http://nfms.dephut.go.id/ipsdh/, coupled

with the WebGIS at http://webgis.dephut.go.id/ for display and viewing.

4 4.4

a

4.4a.3

1

4.4a.31.

b

NFMS is using an upgraded existing system and has been reviwed nationally (by

BIG) and consistent with national guidance.

Note:



4 4.4

a

4.4a.3

1

4.4a.31.

c

Yes, further development is needed. Such as potential source of uncertainty, DSS

platform, simple reporting, etc.


C


Note:



4 4.4

a

4.4a.3

2

4.4a.32.

a

Land Cover Data is produced annually, it can detect lost of forest (deforestation),

but there needs improvement to detect forest regrowth and degradation.

Note:



4 4.4

a

4.4a.3

2

4.4a.32.

b

The system is not yet fit to assess the displacement of emission (leakage).

4 4.4

a

4.4a.3

2

4.4a.32.

c

The system is still an internal mechanism in the MoEF and is in the initiation

process to engaging multi-stakeholder participation.

4 4.4

a

4.4a.3

2

4.4a.32.

d

The system is capable for comparison.

Note:



4 4.4

a

4.4a.3

3

4.4a.33.

a

Yes, mandates are provided.

Note:

Presidential Regulation No. 16/2015 concerning the Ministry of Environment and

Forestry. Available at

http://ditjenppi.menlhk.go.id/reddplus/images/resources/peraturan/Perpres_16

_Tahun_2015-KLHK.pdf

4 4.4

a

4.4a.3

3

4.4a.33.

b

Websites are provided for sharing forest area, and emissions data books are

available.

Note:



4 4.4

a

4.4a.3

3

4.4a.33.

c

Associated resources need to be identified and estimated, but an updated

budget plan is not provided yet.

4 4.4

b

4.4b.3

4

4.4b.34

.a

It has been identified very well. There are national regulations on: Environmental

Impact Assessment (EIA), KLHS, HCVF, and Environmental Audit.

Notes:

- Goverment Regulation No. 27/2012 concerning Environmental Licences.

- Minister of Environment Regulation No. 3/2013 concerning Environmental

Audit.

4 4.4

b

4.4b.3

5

4.4b.35

.a

Non-carbon aspects and safeguards have been shared transparently, from local

to national report. For instance: GHG Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting

(Pemantauan, Evaluasi dan Pelaporan Gas Rumah Kaca, PEP GRK) by Planning

Agency from provincial level to national level, as well as BUR. There is also


C


Ministry of Environment and Forestry Statistics, provided informations regarding

non-carbon aspect on forestry sector.

Notes:

- The Ministry of Environment and Forestry Statistics, available at


- PEP GRK online is available at http://www.sekretariat-rangrk.org/beranda/82-

bahasa/berita/176-sosialisasi-pep.

4 4.4

b

4.4b.3

5

4.4b.35

.b

There are some Directorate Generals within The Ministry of Environment and

Forestry, as well as Provincial and District Forestry Services, and Forest

Management Units have been widely collected data. But the data collections

need to be sincronized each other.

Indicators, e.g. HDI, Gini ratio, Bruto Domestic Income are available in each

district. These indicators need to be linked to the rate of deforestation in order

to know the progress of low emission development. Data of each indicator is

publicly accessible.

Note:


4 4.4

b

4.4b.3

6

4.4b.36

.a

There is a clear mandate from the GHG National Action Plan (Rencana Aksi

Nasional Gas Rumah Kaca, RAN GRK) document, it has been implemented in the

GHG Regional Action Plan (Rencana Aksi Daerah Gas Rumah Kaca, RAD GRK) on

each province, and monitoring are already conducted.

Note:

Presidential Regulation (Peraturan Presiden) No. 61 concerning GHG National

Action Plan Development.

4 4.4

b

4.4b.3

6

4.4b.36

.b

DGCC of MoEF has been identified and estimated the needs of capacity building

activities, trainings, software/hardware, and budget. Such activities have been

implemented both by national and international assisstancy, and also by the

National Development Agency in the GHG National Action Plan (Rencana Aksi

Nasional Gas Rumah Kaca, RAN GRK) and GHG Regional Action Plan (Rencana

Aksi Daerah Gas Rumah Kaca, RAD GRK).

Note:

Strategic Planning of MoEF for 2015 - 2019 as stated by Minister Regulation No.

P.39/Menlhk-Setjen/2015, including programs and activities of DGCC for 2015 –

2019. Available at ttp://ditjenppi.menlhk.go.id/program/program-tahun-2015-

2019.

Annex 5 List of expert invited for virtual survey.



Annex 5 List of REDD+ Projects in Indonesia, Their Project Developers and Organization Type.

No Project Project Proponent Code Source

1 Ulu Masen Ecosystem – A Triple-Benefit Project

Carbon Conservation 3 http://www.forestpeoples.org/sites/fpp/files/publication/2011/10/aceh-briefing-3.pdf

2 Leuser Ecosystem REDD Project

Global EcoRescue 3 http://redd-database.iges.or.jp/redd/download/project?id=51

3 Batang Toru REDD project

Conservation International

1 http://www.biomedcentral.com/content/supplementary/1750-0680-5-7-S2.PDF

4 Tesso Nilo Pilot Project World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF)

1 http://forestclimatecenter.org/map.php?cnt=International&lang=English&ID=4

5 The Kampar Peninsular REDD+ Project

Sinarmas Forestry & PT Putra Riau Perkasa

3 http://theredddesk.org/countries/initiatives/kampar-peninsula-carbon-reserve-riau

6 Kampar Ring - REDD and HTI

Asia Pacific Resources International Limited (APRIL)

3 http://www.redd-monitor.org/2009/10/29/indonesia-

communities-reject-aprils-redd-plans-on-the-kampar-

peninsular/

7 REDD+ Pilot Project in Bengkalis and Siak

Sinarmas Forestry 3 UNREDD. 2012. The Role of UN-REDD in the Development of REDD+ in Indonesia, Vol III Highlight of REDD+ Related Projects in Indonesia. MoF Republic of Indonesia, UN-REDD, FAO, UNDP, UNEP. Jakarta. [http://www.unredd.net/index.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_download&gid=8934&Itemid=53]

8 Siberut Project Global Green 3 http://forestclimatecenter.org/files/2012-03-26%20Indonesia%20-%20REDD%20Demonstration%20Activities.pdf; http://www.globalgreen.co.id/project.html

9 Berbak Carbon Inititiative (BCI)

Zoological Society London (ZSL)

1 http://static.zsl.org/files/berbak-info-sheet-may-2010-1113.pdf

10 Community Carbon Pool in Jambi: Kerinci Seblats buffer zone forest

Flora and Fauna International (FFI)

1 http://forestclimatecenter.org/files/2012-03-26%20Indonesia%20-%20REDD%20Demonstration%20Activities.pdf

11 Rehabilitation of Degraded Peatland in Ogan Komering Ilir, South Sumatra

Sinarmas Forestry 3 UNREDD. 2012. The Role of UN-REDD in the Development of REDD+ in Indonesia, Vol III Highlight of REDD+ Related Projects in Indonesia. MoF Republic of Indonesia, UN-REDD, FAO, UNDP, UNEP. Jakarta. [http://www.unredd.net/index.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_download&gid=8934&Itemid=53]

12 Lebong Carbon Conservation Project

Arthasuaka & Carbon Conservation

3 UNREDD. 2012. The Role of UN-REDD in the Development of REDD+ in Indonesia, Vol III Highlight of REDD+ Related Projects in Indonesia. MoF Republic of Indonesia, UN-REDD, FAO, UNDP, UNEP. Jakarta. https://lebongconservation.wordpress.com/category/about-

lebong-carbon-conservation/ 13 Meru Betiri National

Park Forest Research & Development Agency (FORDA)

2 http://theredddesk.org/countries/initiatives/redd-and-

enhancing-carbon-stocks-meru-betiri-national-park-java

14 Mamberamo River Basin Forest Carbon Project

Conservation International (CI)

1 http://www.conservation.org/publications/Documents/Mamberamo%20Factsheet%20Oct%202007.pdf;

15 Jayapura REDD+ Readiness

World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF)

1 https://redd-indonesia.org/index.php/component/content/article/184-da-redd-indonesia/1500-jayapura

16 Sustainable Management of Poigar Forest

Office National des Forêts (ONF) International

3 http://redd-database.iges.or.jp/redd/download/project?id=21

http://www.forestpeoples.org/sites/fpp/files/publication/2011/10/aceh-briefing-3.pdf

http://www.forestpeoples.org/sites/fpp/files/publication/2011/10/aceh-briefing-3.pdf

http://redd-database.iges.or.jp/redd/download/project?id=51


http://www.biomedcentral.com/content/supplementary/1750-0680-5-7-S2.PDF

http://www.biomedcentral.com/content/supplementary/1750-0680-5-7-S2.PDF

http://forestclimatecenter.org/map.php?cnt=International&lang=English&ID=4


http://theredddesk.org/countries/initiatives/kampar-peninsula-carbon-reserve-riau

http://theredddesk.org/countries/initiatives/kampar-peninsula-carbon-reserve-riau

http://www.redd-monitor.org/2009/10/29/indonesia-communities-reject-aprils-redd-plans-on-the-kampar-peninsular/



http://forestclimatecenter.org/files/2012-03-26%20Indonesia%20-%20REDD%20Demonstration%20Activities.pdf




http://static.zsl.org/files/berbak-info-sheet-may-2010-1113.pdf

http://static.zsl.org/files/berbak-info-sheet-may-2010-1113.pdf




https://lebongconservation.wordpress.com/category/about-lebong-carbon-conservation/

https://lebongconservation.wordpress.com/category/about-lebong-carbon-conservation/

http://theredddesk.org/countries/initiatives/redd-and-enhancing-carbon-stocks-meru-betiri-national-park-java

http://theredddesk.org/countries/initiatives/redd-and-enhancing-carbon-stocks-meru-betiri-national-park-java

http://www.conservation.org/publications/Documents/Mamberamo%20Factsheet%20Oct%202007.pdf;

http://www.conservation.org/publications/Documents/Mamberamo%20Factsheet%20Oct%202007.pdf;

https://redd-indonesia.org/index.php/component/content/article/184-da-redd-indonesia/1500-jayapura






17 Sulbar Habitat REDD+ Keepthehabitat 1 http://theredddesk.org/countries/initiatives/sulbar-habitat-west-sulawesi

18 Berau Forest Carbon Project

The Nature Conservency (TNC)

1 Berau REDD+ Working Group. 2011. Berau Forest Carbon Program 2011-2015. Berau REDD+ Working Group in cooperation with the Government of Berau District East Kalimantan Province, Ministry of Forestry of the Republic of Indonesia, The Nature Conservancy (TNC).

19 FORCLIME - Berau Demonstration Activity (REDD via SFM strengthening)

GoI, Berau District Gov, GFA, GTZ-KfW

2 UNREDD. 2012. The Role of UN-REDD in the Development of REDD+ in Indonesia, Vol III Highlight of REDD+ Related Projects in Indonesia. MoF Republic of Indonesia, UN-REDD, FAO, UNDP, UNEP. Jakarta. [http://www.unredd.net/index.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_download&gid=8934&Itemid=53]

20 FORCLIME - Malinau Demonstration Activity (Kayan Mentarang NP)



21 East Borneo Project Global Green 3 https://www.globalgreen.co.id/project2.html

22 Hutan Lestari untuk Orangutan: Kehje Sewen Forest

Borneo Orangutan Survival(BOS)

1 http://www.forests4orangutans.org/projects/hutan-lestari-project-everlasting-forest/

23 REDD in Kutai Barat District (i-REDD project)



24 Kalimantan Forest and Climate Partnership (KFCP)

GoA, GoI, Care 2 http://redd-database.iges.or.jp/redd/download/project;jsessionid=F5414B40A100A330B258A615F97995C8?id=57

25 Forest Carbon Partnership Facility (FCPF) – the World Bank

Ministry of Enviroment and Forestry (DGCC & FORDA)

2 https://www.forestcarbonpartnership.org/indonesia

26 Katingan Peat Conservation Project

Starling Resources, PT RMU

3 http://katinganproject.com/about-us

27 Community Carbon Project for Lamandau Wildlife Reserve

RARE & YAYORIN 1 http://forestclimatecenter.org/map.php?cnt=International&lang=English&ID=45

28 REDD in Sebangau National Park


1 UNREDD 2012

29 Rewetting of Peatland to avoid emission in Sebangau National Park


1 http://database.v-c-s.org/sites/v-c-s.org/files/140725_SNP%20Peat%20Rewettting%20Project%20-%20CCB%20PDD%20-%20V06.pdf

30 The Rimba Raya Biodiversity Reserve Project

Infinite Earth / OFI 3 http://redd-database.iges.or.jp/redd/download/project;jsessionid=F5414B40A100A330B258A615F97995C8?id=90

31 Danau Siawan-Belida Ecological Restoration Concession

FFI & PT. Wana Hijau Nusantara

1 http://moderncms.ecosystemmarketplace.com/repository/moderncms_documents/redd_project-doc.pdf

http://theredddesk.org/countries/initiatives/sulbar-habitat-west-sulawesi

http://theredddesk.org/countries/initiatives/sulbar-habitat-west-sulawesi

https://www.globalgreen.co.id/project2.html

http://www.forests4orangutans.org/projects/hutan-lestari-project-everlasting-forest/

http://www.forests4orangutans.org/projects/hutan-lestari-project-everlasting-forest/

http://redd-database.iges.or.jp/redd/download/project;jsessionid=F5414B40A100A330B258A615F97995C8?id=57



http://katinganproject.com/about-us



http://povertyandconservation.info/sites/default/files/07%20Bambang%20Supriyanto%20(Ministry%20of%20Forestry,%20Indonesia)%20Establishment%20of%20DA%20REDD%2B%20in%20Sebangau%20National%20Park.pdf

http://database.v-c-s.org/sites/v-c-s.org/files/140725_SNP%20Peat%20Rewettting%20Project%20-%20CCB%20PDD%20-%20V06.pdf






http://moderncms.ecosystemmarketplace.com/repository/moderncms_documents/redd_project-doc.pdf

http://moderncms.ecosystemmarketplace.com/repository/moderncms_documents/redd_project-doc.pdf


32 FORCLIME - Kapuas Hulu Demonstration Activity (Sustainable Management and Conservation of Peat swamp forest)



33 Ketapang Community Carbon Pool (KCCP): Laman Satong & Permatang Gadung Village


1 http://www.cifor.org/redd-case-book/case-reports/indonesia/ketapang-community-carbon-pools-west-kalimantan-indonesia/

34 Kapuas Hulu Community Carbon Pool: Piasak & Jongkong Kiri Hilir Villages & Nanga Betung Village



35 Reducing Emission from Deforestation caused by the Oil Palm Sector in Ketapang: PT. Cipta Usaha Sejati & PT. Jalin Vaneo



36 Reducing Emission from Deforestation caused by the Oil Palm Sector in Ketapang: PT. Kayong Agro Lestari



37 Korea-Indonesia Joint Project for Adaptation and Mitigation of Climate Change in Forestry ( North Batu kliang protection forest )

Forest Research and Development Agency (FORDA)

2 http://forestclimatecenter.org/map.php?cnt=International&lang=English&ID=41

Note: Organization type code: 1 = NGO, 2 = Bilateral/Government, and 3 = Private. Data updated on July 2013.

Annex 6 Comparation between MTR 2016 and R-Package progress

Component/sub

component MTR 2014 R Package 2016

1. Readiness Organization and Consultation

1a. National REDD+ Management Arrangement

Yellow Feedback and GRM has been piloting at some REDD+ Demonstration Activities. Those lesson learned will be used for basis to develop GRM at National level.

Yellow The specific system of feedback and handling complaints, as well as tools and mechanisms for REDD+ throughout the country is under development. DGCC is currently designing the Government Internal Control System (Sistem Pengendalian Internal Pemerintah/SPIP) which serves as an ongoing compliance for quality management standard (ISO 9001). In

http://www.cifor.org/redd-case-book/case-reports/indonesia/ketapang-community-carbon-pools-west-kalimantan-indonesia/






addition, all projects and REDD+ Demonstration Activities in Indonesia provide feedback and grievance and/or compensation mechanism in respective area/region

1b. Consultation, Participation, and Outreach

Green (4)

Information sharing and accessibility of information, implementation and public disclosure of consultation outcomes to some extent have been done but need further works are needed

Orange (2)

Participation, engagement, and consultation processes have been done, both in national and Sub-national levels. However, due to the limitations of technology, the width of the area, and the complexity of the stakeholders, it required a more effective communication strategy. (The different result comes from the different point of view. R-Package result evaluates the progress at national and sub-national levels, while MTR 2014 was focused on national entities only).


2a: Assessment of Land Use, Land Use Change Drivers, Forest Law, Policy and Governance

Yellow Although some parts of the criteria (iv) and (v) have been implemented, additional action plans need to be funded either by LoI of Indonesia -Norway and other scheme.

Green There are ample analysis and assessment on land use, drivers of changes on land-use, policy and governance.

The results of analysis from central government, local governments, research agencies, NGOs, and other institutions–both published and unpublished analytic works–were mostly used to prioritize key direct and indirect drivers to be addressed by the programs and policies in the REDD+ strategy.

2b: REDD+ Strategy Options

Orange BP REDD+ and Ministry of Forestry (RPP-FCPF) are working to develop a set of policies and programs for addressing the drivers of deforestation and/or forest degradation address to meet the criteria.

Green REDD+ Strategy Options were selected via transparent and participatory processes. It is important to have a full support from the local politics to do feasibility assessment for REDD+ Strategy Options. The result of identification showed minor inconsistencies between the priority REDD+ Strategy Options, policies and programs. The agreed timeline and process to resolve the inconsistencies is in place, but not operational. This process also requires support from broader community.

2c: Implementation Framework

Orange Work on implementation frameworks has been ongoing. Additional budget from RPP-FCPF is needed to fully meet the cirteria for developing REDD+ registry and benefit sharing mechanism.

Orange Some legislations and/or regulations related to REDD+ programs and activities have been enacted, adopted and implemented in Indonesia. Among others are the moratorium of new license in primary forest and peatland for improving forest governance, and One Map Policy. However, there is a lack of adoption and implementation of laws and regulations by private sectors, in relation to low carbon development due to incentive policy that is not available yet. Forest Management Unit (FMU) will become the base for the implementation of REDD+ framework.


National Registry System, where registry system for REDD+ is included and launched by the MoEF in November 2016.

2d: Social and Environmental Impacts

Orange SESA has been develop and advancing to be tested in more region. ESMF is scheduled to be done shortly.

Yellow Indonesia has many instruments to provide social and environmental analysis in order to support the development of the safeguards initiatives. . Indonesia has also established the Safeguards Information System for REDD+. Yet, a conceptual framework of ESMF and SESA needed to be developed

2e. Funding Instrument and Benefit Sharing Mechanism

Included in 2c Yellow Although fund institution has not been established yet, but funding mechanism arrangement is in on going process to be legalized by Government Regulation. Funding mechanism will be in the form of General Service Agency (Badan Layanan Umum/BLU) of Environmental Financing.

Several existing options of benefit sharing mechanism in Indonesia are available, such as: fiscal transfer, Specific Allocation Funds (Dana Aloksi Khusus/DAK), General Allocation Funds (Dana Alokasi Umum/DAU), National Community Empowerment Program (Program Nasional Pemberdayaan Masyarakat/PNPM), etc.

3. Reference Emissions Level/Reference Levels

3. Reference Emissions Level/Reference Levels

Yellow BP REDD+ and Ministry of Forestry have made significant progress on developing REL/RL. Further work is needed to finalise the general approach at national level.

Green FREL has been under technical assessment by UNFCCC and almost completed with no significant correction, land use data and peat land need to be synchronize.

4. Monitoring Systems for Forests and Safeguards

4a: National Forest Monitoring System

Orange Indonesia’s National Forest monitoring System has been developed by the Ministry of Forestry, Republic of Indonesia. It was developed to update data, especially for land cover data, forest cover change, deforestation, hotspots, and to ensure imagery data (Landsat) are continuously included in forest monitoring.

Yellow Activity data has been under development of interpretation adjustment from manual to automatic. NFMS using an upgraded existing system that has been reviewed nationally by BIG, and consistent with national guidance. Land Cover Data is produced annually. It can detect deforestation, but needs improvement to detect forest regrowth and degradation.

4b: Information

Orange Safeguards Information System (SIS) for REDD+

Green Web-based Safeguards Information System (SIS) for REDD+ have been developed.


System for Multiple Benefits, Other Impacts, Governance, and Safeguards

have been developed. PCI has been piloted in Berau, Central Kalimantan and Jamb. On the other hand, SIS REDD/Web Platform database has been piloted in Jambi and East Kalimantan Further capacity required at sub national level

Relevant non-carbon aspects as well as social and environmental issues have been addressed in Indonesia very well. There are some Directorate Generals within The Ministry of Environment and Forestry, the Provincial and District Forestry Services, as well as the Forest Management Units that have been widely collecting data. However, these data collections need to be synchronized.